[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 147 (2001), Part 7]
[House]
[Pages 10127-10128]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]



                  STANDARD TRADE NEGOTIATING AUTHORITY

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under a previous order of the House, the 
gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. English) is recognized for 5 minutes.
  Mr. ENGLISH. Mr. Speaker, I rise on a topic that is of central 
importance to our economy for many years to come, a topic which 
Congress is going to be called upon to consider in the near future, and 
I think has to consider in a bipartisan way in thinking outside of the 
box, thinking outside of their traditional ways of approaching it. I am 
referring here, of course, to the topic of trade and trade negotiating 
authority for the President.
  Mr. Speaker, more than 200 years ago, Benjamin Franklin wisely 
observed that no Nation was ever ruined by trade. Back then, the United 
States was a small part of the global economy. By far, the largest 
portion of the wealth of the world lay outside of our borders. Franklin 
was simply expressing that which was obvious to most Americans, the 
wealthiest and most powerful nations on Earth were the great trading 
powers. If the U.S. were ever to live up to its potential, we had to 
plug in, we had to participate in the global economy. An island, even 
one of continental scale, could not expect to prosper by sealing its 
borders to the commercial opportunities that lie abroad.
  But today, Mr. Speaker, all that has changed. Or has it?
  Following World War II, the U.S. temporarily was an economic colossus 
such as the world had never seen. By some measures, we accounted for 
over 50 percent of world economic output. Gradually, however, the old 
balance was restored. Europe and East Asia were rebuilt, international 
trade soared as the nightmare effects of the war and depression-causing 
tariff walls were swept away, economies prospered, and tens of millions 
were lifted from poverty. Today, 75 percent of the world economy is 
outside of our borders.
  Some would suggest, even after the experience of the last 5 decades, 
that all economic growth abroad comes at our expense. They seem to 
think this is a zero sum game. They seem to think that there is a 
finite amount of money in the world and that for someone to win, 
someone else must lose.
  I categorically reject that argument. In the complex web of 
international trade, other nations are not simply competitors, although 
that is certainly an important component of our relationship. They are 
also our customers. They are our suppliers. And, more than 
occasionally, they are our partners in joint ventures. We depend on 
them and they depend on us. Or can they?
  For 6 years now, the President of the United States, the leader of 
the free world and representative of the largest single economy on the 
planet, has lacked the authority to negotiate trade agreements, 
agreements that could pry open foreign markets, reduce and even 
eliminate unfair trading practices and create and preserve more jobs 
here at home. All of this is beyond the reach of the President of the 
United States.
  How did we get into this mess? How did we reach a situation where our 
government lacks the same ability to protect and advance our interests 
that even the smallest international player takes for granted?
  While I supported many of the trade policies of the last 
administration, particularly their efforts to preserve our antidumping 
and counterveiling duty laws, the sad fact is that they forfeited 
America's leadership role by simple default. None of this would matter 
if the rest of the world were standing still, but the rest of humanity 
is impatient for economic progress.
  All around us, our trading partners, tired of U.S. excuses and 
delays, are joining and forming new trade alliances without us. Europe 
is forming new trade pacts all across Latin America, South America and 
North Africa. The nations of East Asia are actively working to form a 
new regional combine. America is not even a party to these discussions. 
It is time to break through the either/or, dead-end fast track debate 
and move beyond the current stalemate to allow for full consideration 
of the legitimate issues that confront us in trade negotiating 
authority.
  To restore the President's ability to advance our interests, I have 
introduced H.R. 1446, the Standard Trade Negotiating Authority Act, as 
a new approach to trade promotion authority. Over the course of the 
next several weeks, I will describe in greater detail the most 
important sections of this bill. But today I would like to outline

[[Page 10128]]

some of its basic provisions for the House.
  My bill provides ongoing negotiating authority for the President but 
differs from fast track by requiring preauthorization from the Congress 
for a specific country for a specific negotiation before the President 
enters into negotiations. Legitimate concerns regarding environmental 
and labor standards are addressed during the preauthorization process 
through the creation of a new commission which will draft specific 
recommendations to be included in the negotiation goals. This ensures 
that blue and green concerns are considered, where appropriate, as part 
of a trade negotiation. When negotiations are complete, the President 
will submit the agreement along with a plan for implementation and 
enforcement to Congress for final approval. He must also outline any 
costs that accompany the plan.
  This bill is an attempt to demystify the stale debate surrounding 
trade agreements, open the process to greater public and congressional 
scrutiny, making it more transparent, provide for a way to address real 
blue and green concerns and restore the U.S. to its leadership role on 
the international stage.
  A few weeks ago, the President submitted his trade proposal to 
Congress. In my view, he correctly outlined his goals to expand our 
export markets while leaving Congress with a great deal of discretion 
for determining the best way to proceed. My legislation answers this 
challenge by creating a framework that provides for appropriate 
oversight of trade agreements before, during and after their 
completion.
  I urge my colleagues to set aside partisan rancor, set aside 
traditional ideological classifications and consider this bill 
carefully. I would welcome their efforts to join with me to build a 
bipartisan coalition to take a new approach to trade in America.

                          ____________________