[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 147 (2001), Part 20]
[SENAT]
[Page 27796]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]



                     EXPIRATION OF TRADE PROVISIONS

  Mr. BAUCUS. Mr. President, in the whirlwind of activity that always 
accompanies the end of a legislative session, many critical legislative 
decisions are made and critical legislation passes. Often it takes some 
time to tote up the wins and losses and arrive at a final evaluation of 
what has been achieved and what remains to be done.
  Despite the efforts of those in the Senate, one of the losses for the 
session is the expiration of three key trade programs, the Generalized 
System of Preferences (GSP), the Andean Trade Preferences Act (ATPA), 
and Trade Adjustment Assistance program.
  What is surprising about the expiration of these programs is all 
three of them have nearly universal support. They expire not because of 
a legitimate difference in policies and not because the programs have 
served their purpose. They expire because of political maneuvering in 
the House.
  In my view, it always reflects poorly on the Congress when needed 
programs expire due to political machinations or simply lack of 
attention. It sends poor signals to those that depend on these 
programs. In this case, the U.S. companies that import products under 
GSP and ATPA and the foreign countries we are attempting to aid through 
these programs can hardly avoid the impression that these programs are 
a low priority for Congress.
  In the case of ATPA, there are those that believe that expiration 
will spur a rapid move to expand ATPA. I support an expansion of ATPA, 
but I believe such brinkmanship is far more likely to result in a long 
break in ATPA than it is a quick expansion.
  Fortunately, in the case of both GSP and ATPA it is possible to 
extend these tariff benefits retroactively. If the U.S. importers are 
able to shift funds and wait, there is a good chance they will 
ultimately receive the promised benefits from these programs.
  Sadly, this is not the case with the expiration of the Trade 
Adjustment Assistance program. This program provides income support and 
training benefits to workers who have lost their jobs due to trade. It 
provides them the opportunity to train for a new job and rebuild their 
lives. Given that they are unemployed, they are generally not in a 
position to absorb a three month or a six month break in benefits.
  I understand that the Department of Labor plans to advise the state 
agencies that work with them to administer TAA plan to advise those 
agencies to keep paying benefits because they expect the program to be 
reauthorized. The Department of Labor's advise is sound; indeed, I hope 
to win passage for a considerable expansion of TAA.
  Unfortunately, there is no guarantee that state agencies will keep 
operating based upon this federal promise and borrow money from other 
programs to support TAA. In fact, in at least 5 states, state law 
prohibits such fund shifting.
  This raises the prospect that some of the 35,000 TAA recipients 
around the United States will receive a very nasty Christmas present--
the unexpected halt of the benefits on which they depend to rebuild 
their lives and support their families.
  Mr. President, I believe Congress is sometimes criticized unfairly. 
Sometimes, however, the rush of events diverts attention from some of 
the glaring errors we make.
  The stubborn obstinance of some of the other body to extend TAA is, 
in my view, a shameful example of playing politics with the interest of 
those citizens that can least afford it. I hope this example is not 
lost on journalists, editorial writers, and, ultimately, voters. 
Someone should be held accountable.

                          ____________________