[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 151 (2005), Part 4]
[Senate]
[Pages 5813-5814]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




   FOREIGN RELATIONS AUTHORIZATION ACT, FISCAL YEARS 2006 AND 2007--
                               Continued

  Ms. STABENOW. Mr. President, I rise today to speak about an amendment 
my colleague Senator Lindsey Graham and I have submitted that would 
create a special trade prosecutor within the Office of the U.S. Trade 
Representative.
  It is my understanding, working with our leader and the chairman of 
the Finance Committee, that we are not going to proceed with this 
amendment and instead will be entering into a colloquy with the 
chairman of the Finance Committee about his willingness to work with us 
to add language to create a special trade prosecutor on appropriate 
legislation coming to the Finance Committee to reauthorize trade laws. 
We look forward to working with him. I look forward to the colloquy we 
will be submitting for the Record shortly.
  I thought it was important to be able to speak about this issue for a 
moment because I know there are many of us on both sides of the aisle 
who are deeply concerned about what is happening as it relates to 
unfair trade practices by other countries. We want to work together on 
a bipartisan basis in order to address this, and address this as 
quickly as possible. That is why I am so pleased Senator Graham has 
joined with me as an author of this amendment. We also have a separate 
bill as well to do the same thing. We look forward to working with the 
Finance Committee in order to be able to create the prosecutor and to 
include legislation in a future bill coming to the Senate.
  This amendment is based on the concept by Senator Bayh from Indiana. 
I thank him for being a serious and thoughtful voice in this debate, 
for his ongoing advocacy, and for providing the Senate with solutions 
to fix our growing trade deficit. I congratulate Senator Bayh as well.
  This amendment would create a special trade prosecutor appointed by 
the President and confirmed by the Senate with authority to ensure 
compliance with trade agreements and to protect our manufacturers as 
well as our farmers against unfair trade practices. This prosecutor 
will have the authority to investigate and recommend the prosecution of 
cases before the WTO, as well as those under trade agreements to which 
the United States is a party.
  Currently, we have an executive branch that is organized in such a 
way as to make prosecution of unfair trade cases unlikely, at best. 
This trade prosecutor would allow us to fix that. Coupled with the fact 
that our domestic manufacturing base has eroded due to unfair trade 
practices, and we have put our manufacturers and others in our economy 
in an impossible situation, we are asking our U.S. Trade Representative 
to do too much and the office is not able to deliver. We ask that they 
negotiate trade agreements with foreign nations at one moment and then 
turn around and enforce agreements the next, all without damaging the 
ability of the United States to negotiate the next trade deal. It is 
not working. While significant portions of our trade imbalances are not 
caused by lax enforcement, many of them are.
  In February, the Department of Commerce reported that the merchandise 
trade deficit reached a record level of $666.2 billion in 2004, a 21.7-
percent increase since 2003. That translates into job loss. The 
aggregate U.S. trade deficit, which includes both goods and services, 
was $617.7 billion dollars, a 24-percent increase over 2003. We have 
many trading partners that fulfill their obligations under our 
agreements, but we also have many that do not. We should address this 
problem with a straightforward solution, a special trade prosecutor.
  Yesterday, we finally saw a glimmer of hope on the trade front as the 
administration began the process of imposing import quotas on shirts, 
trousers, and underwear. But it could have come much sooner if we had 
someone in the Government whose job it was to look for these violations 
and to recommend action.
  Commerce Secretary Gutierrez, a man whom I respect and strongly 
supported as Secretary of Commerce, coming from the great State of 
Michigan, is already having a positive impact. I hope he will pursue 
this case until our textile industry finally gets the relief it 
deserves.
  That is not enough. There are more U.S. industries facing similar 
unfair trade practices. We are proposing an institutional change that 
will allow us to thoroughly and vigorously investigate and prosecute 
these cases.
  For instance, China is a textbook case of how a foreign government 
has used a network of illegal subsidies and government interventions in 
order to destroy foreign competition both in the United States as well 
as in many other countries.
  According to the United States-China Economic and Security 
Commission, these actions have gone virtually unchallenged by the U.S. 
Government, despite the fact that China's actions are in clear 
violation of both U.S. trade law and WTO rules.
  These anticompetitiveness actions by the Chinese Government include 
currency manipulation. I am very proud to have been a cosponsor of the 
amendment that overwhelmingly passed earlier today, bipartisan 
amendment, to send a very strong message to China regarding the fact we 
will no longer tolerate the manipulation of their currency. It is 
causing job loss. It is causing pressure on our American businesses. I 
am pleased we were able to address that.
  It is estimated that currency manipulation provides as much as a 40-
percent subsidy for Chinese exporters. In addition, the Chinese 
Government also has illegal direct Government subsidies of its state-
owned textile and apparel sectors, illegal export tax rebates of about 
13 percent, and the deliberate extension of billions of dollars in 
nonperforming or free money loans by China's central banks in order to 
award a competitive advantage against foreign competition.
  The Commission goes on to say that in the case of China, the dramatic 
increase in subsidies has caused Chinese prices to drop by an average 
of 58 percent over the past 2 years in those product areas where the 
quotas have been removed.
  As a result, China has begun a near monopoly share in these products 
over the last 24 months, gaining 60 percent of the market.
  Our businesses in Michigan just ask for a level playing field. They 
just ask the rules be fair. It is our job to make sure they are. 
However, our Government has failed to file any complaints at the WTO 
despite the Chinese Government's repeated and widespread violations of 
WTO rules. This is of grave concern to colleagues on both sides of the 
aisle and was reflected again in the

[[Page 5814]]

vote earlier today as it relates to China's manipulation of their 
currency.
  Last year, as is widely reported, our Government refused to criticize 
China's human rights and labor rights record before the United Nations 
Human Rights Commission despite overwhelming evidence of human rights 
violations.
  Our Government's inaction is costing hundreds of thousands of 
American jobs--I argue that is rapidly becoming millions crippling our 
manufacturing sector, distorting trade and investment patterns 
globally, and leaving hundreds of millions of Chinese workers 
vulnerable and mistreated, as well.
  Let me give a few examples of the violations occurring. Counterfeit 
automotive products are a big problem in my home State of Michigan. Not 
only does it kill American jobs, but it has the potential to kill 
Americans as cheap, shoddy automotive products replace legitimate ones 
of higher quality. The American automotive part and components industry 
loses an estimated $12 billion in sales on a global basis to 
counterfeiting. We do not even keep statistics on the potential loss of 
life. We should understand if left unchecked, this penetration of 
counterfeit automotive products jobs has the potential to undermine the 
public's confidence and trust in what they are buying. We cannot let 
that happen.
  Our amendment, the effort we will work on with the Finance Committee, 
will give us a voice and a watchdog so we can take appropriate action 
sooner, more aggressively, more appropriately.
  In Michigan, we lost 51,000 manufacturing jobs from 1989-2003 due to 
China's unfair trade practices, according to the Economic Policy 
Institute.
  Unfortunately, the plant closings continue in Michigan and around the 
Nation. Over the past three months we see example after example of the 
damage a ``wait and see'' attitude has on workers in this country.
  Lear Corporation continues to cut jobs in Grand Rapids, a total of 
300 to date, and the company promises more layoffs this summer. Also, 
in Grand Rapids, Steelcase will cut 600 jobs. The ripple effect of Lear 
Corporation's decision will lead Advanced Plastics in Schoolcraft, MI, 
to layoff more than 100 employees this spring.
  The City of Edmore recently lost 120 high paying manufacturing jobs 
at the local Hitachi plant. Those jobs are moving to China.
  In Alma, 260 employees at Oxford Automotive are now unemployed due to 
the competitive pressures in the automotive industry, a large part of 
which is due to current manipulation by Japan and China.
  And the examples don't end there as we all know. We should not be 
shirking our responsibilities to enforce trade rules. This amendment 
helps us do that. And it helps us save American jobs.
  I believe in trade and the benefits it can have for our 
manufacturers, farmers, and other industries. But, we need to have fair 
trade first and foremost.
  A Special Trade Prosecutor would have the power to stand up for our 
manufacturers and farmers and make sure that other countries are 
holding up their end of their trade agreements.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Tennessee is recognized.
  (The remarks of Mr. Alexander pertaining to the introduction of S. 
726 and S. 727 are printed in today's Record under ``Statements on 
Introduced Bills and Joint Resolutions.'')
  Mr. ALEXANDER. Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. DeMINT). The clerk will call the roll.
  The legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Mr. DAYTON. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for 
the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  Mr. DAYTON. Mr. President, I rise to discuss an amendment that I have 
filed and will offer formally. It is a sense-of-the-Senate resolution 
that calls for the United Nations to give full nation membership status 
to Israel.
  Unfortunately, and wrongly, Israel has not been granted the full 
status that other 190-nation members enjoy, ever since it became a 
nation state in 1948 and formally became a member of the United Nations 
in 1949. For over 50 years, until the year 2000, Israel was the only 
member state that was consistently denied admission into a regional 
group.
  Even now, it is still limited to the Western European and others 
group in New York but not in Geneva and elsewhere. As a result, for 
example, Israel cannot participate in the voting for the composition of 
the International Court of Justice in The Hague, nor can an Israeli 
judge serve on that court. Yet the court is called upon, and was 
recently, by other nations and the General Assembly to pass judgment on 
the actions of Israel to protect its national borders and to secure the 
lives and the safety of its citizens.
  Also, as a result of the denial of full status, Israel is not allowed 
to participate in United Nations conferences on human rights, racism, 
and other issues held in world locations, which is particularly 
important since some of those conferences unfairly discriminate against 
Israel in their consideration of issues they do not consider to the 
same extent or at all as they affect other member nation states.
  My amendment says it is the sense of Congress that President Bush 
should direct the U.S. permanent representative to the United Nations 
to seek an immediate end to the persistent and deplorable inequality 
that is experienced by Israel in the United Nations; that Israel should 
be afforded the benefits of full membership in Western European and 
other groups in the United Nations to achieve that full participation, 
and that the U.S. Secretary of State should report to Congress on a 
regular basis on the actions of the administration to encourage 
Israel's full acceptance by other member states in the United Nations. 
Obviously this law and those requirements would apply equally to future 
administrations of our Government as well.
  It is ironic because the United Nations created the State of Israel 
back in 1948, and yet it has been the body where some of the most anti-
Semitic and discriminatory attacks against the democratically elected 
Government of the people of Israel have taken place. There have been 
some improvements. There have been recognitions most recently by 
Secretary Kofi Annan of the anti-Semitic and anti-Israel bias 
historically in the United Nations. Some progress has been made, but 
some is not full progress or acceptance, and some is not enough.
  The United Nations was founded upon the principle that all member 
nations of the world, all of which may be engaged to some or another 
extent in practices or activities that other nations may disagree with, 
are equal members there for the purpose of resolving the differences 
among nations and among the peoples of the world peacefully, equitably, 
and hopefully in the ultimate best interests of all concerned. So by 
denying this great nation, a democratic government and the people of 
Israel, the full rights of citizenship in that world body runs contrary 
to the founding principles and the purpose of the United Nations. It is 
destructive to the attempt to resolve the differences in the Middle 
East peacefully, equitably, and hopefully permanently for the benefit 
of all concerned.
  I yield the floor, and I suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
  The assistant legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Mr. ENZI. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for 
the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.

                          ____________________