[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 154 (2008), Part 8]
[Senate]
[Pages 11349-11356]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




          STATEMENTS ON INTRODUCED BILLS AND JOINT RESOLUTIONS

      By Mrs. FEINSTEIN (for herself, Mr. Gregg, Ms. Cantwell, Mr. 
        Allard, and Ms. Collins):
  S. 3080. A bill to ensure parity between the temporary duty imposed 
on ethanol and tax credits provided on ethanol; to the Committee on 
Finance.
  Mrs. FEINSTEIN. Mr. President, I rise to introduce the Imported 
Ethanol Parity Act of 2008.
  This legislation is cosponsored by Senators Gregg, Cantwell, Allard 
and Collins.
  First, let me explain what this bill does. The Imported Ethanol 
Parity Act instructs the President to lower the ethanol import tariff, 
so that it is no higher than the subsidy for blending ethanol into 
gasoline.
  This legislation is necessary because the Farm Bill extended the 
tariff for two more years at $0.54 per gallon, even though the Farm 
Bill reduced the ethanol blending subsidy to $0.45 per gallon.
  In effect, the Farm Bill has turned the tariff from an ``offset'' 
into a true trade barrier of at least $0.09 per gallon.
  The Ethanol tariff poses many problems.
  It increases the cost of Gasoline in the United States by making 
ethanol more expensive.
  It prevents Americans from importing ethanol made from sugarcane. 
Sugar ethanol is the only available transportation fuel that works in 
today's cars and emits considerably less lifecycle greenhouse gas than 
gasoline;.

[[Page 11350]]

  It taxes imports from our friends in Brazil, India, and Australia, 
while oil and gasoline imports from OPEC enter the United States tax 
free.
  It hinders the emergence of a global biofuels marketplace through 
which countries with a strong biofuel crop could sell fuel to countries 
that suffered drought or other agricultural difficulties in the same 
crop year. Such a global market would permit mutually beneficial trade 
between producing regions and stabilize both fuel and food prices.
  It makes us more dependent on the Middle East for fuel when we should 
be increasing the number of countries from whom we buy fuel. When it 
comes to energy security for the United States, which has less than 3 
percent of proven global oil reserves and 25 percent of demand, we must 
diversify supply.
  Bottom Line: until the tariff is lowered, the United States will tax 
the only fuel it can import that increases energy security, reduces 
greenhouse gas emissions, and lowers gasoline prices.
  In 2006 I introduced legislation to eliminate the ethanol tariff 
entirely, and in 2007 I cosponsored an amendment to the Energy Bill 
which would have eliminated the tariff.
  The Imported Ethanol Parity Act is a different proposal that I 
believe addresses the concerns of tariff defenders.
  The advocates of the $0.54 per gallon tariff on ethanol imports have 
always argued that the tariff is necessary in order to offset the 
blender subsidy that applies to the use of all ethanol, whether 
produced domestically or internationally. They argue that the ethanol 
subsidy exists to support American farmers who produce ethanol at 
higher cost than foreign producers.
  For instance, on May 6, 2006, the Chairman of the Senate Finance 
Committee stated on the Senate floor that, ``the U.S. tariff on ethanol 
operates as an offset to an excise tax credit that applies to both 
domestically produced and imported ethanol.''
  On May 9, 2006, the Renewable Fuels Association stated in a press 
release: ``the secondary tariff exists as an offset to the tax 
incentive gasoline refiners receive for every gallon of ethanol they 
blend, regardless of the ethanol's origin.''
  In a letter to Congress dated June 20, 2007, the American Coalition 
for Ethanol, the American Farm Bureau Federation, the National Corn 
Growers Association, the National Council of Farmer Cooperatives, the 
National Sorghum Producers, and the Renewable Fuels Association stated 
that the ``(blender) tax credit is available to refiners regardless of 
whether the ethanol blended is imported or domestic. To prevent U.S. 
taxpayers from subsidizing foreign ethanol companies, Congress passed 
an offset to the tax credit that foreign companies pay in the form of a 
tariff.''
  Just this month, the Renewable Fuels Association's Executive Director 
asserted that ``The tariff is there not so much to protect the industry 
but the U.S. taxpayer.''
  Bottom Line: the tariff cannot be justifiably maintained at $0.54 per 
gallon if its intent is to offset a $0.45 per gallon blender subsidy, 
and it should be reduced.
  Ethanol from Brazil or Australia should not have to overcome a trade 
barrier that no drop of OPEC oil must face.
  Tariff defenders either should support this legislation or explain 
how a tariff can justifiably be higher than the subsidy it is designed 
to offset.
  Climate Change is the most significant environmental challenge we 
face, and I believe that lowering the ethanol tariff will make it less 
expensive for the United States to combat global warming.
  The fuel we burn to power our cars is a major source of the 
greenhouse gas emissions warming our planet. To reduce this impact, we 
need to increase the fuel efficiency of our vehicles and lower the 
lifecycle carbon emissions of the fuel itself.
  For this reason, in March 2007, I introduced the Clean Fuels and 
Vehicles Act with Senators Olympia Snowe and Susan Collins.
  The legislation proposed a ``Low Carbon Fuels Standard,'' which would 
require each major oil company selling gasoline in the United States to 
reduce the average lifecycle greenhouse gas emissions per unit of 
energy in their gasoline by 3 percent by 2015 and by 3 percent more in 
2020.
  The legislation was modeled on the state of California's Low Carbon 
Fuels Standard, which also requires a reduction in the lifecycle 
greenhouse gas emissions from transportation fuels.
  This concept became a major aspect of the Energy Independence and 
Security Act of 2007, in which Congress required oil companies to use 
an increasing quantity of ``advanced biofuels'' that produce at least 
50 percent less lifecycle greenhouse gas than gasoline.
  Unfortunately the ethanol tariff puts a trade barrier in front of the 
lowest carbon fuel available, making it considerably more expensive for 
the United States to lower the lifecycle carbon emissions of 
transportation fuel.
  The lifecycle greenhouse gas emissions of ethanol vary depending on 
production methods and feedstocks, and these differences will impact 
the degree to which ethanol may be used to meet ``low-carbon'' fuel 
requirements under California law and the Energy Independence and 
Security Act of 2007.
  For instance, sugar cane ethanol plants use biomass from sugar stalks 
as process energy, resulting in less fossil fuel input compared to 
current corn-to-ethanol processes. By comparison, researchers at the 
University of California concluded that ``only 5 to 26 percent of the 
energy content (in corn ethanol) is renewable. The rest is primarily 
natural gas and coal,'' which are used in the production process.
  The 2007 California Energy Commission Report entitled Full Fuel Cycle 
Assessment: Well-to-Wheels Energy Inputs, Emissions, and Water Impacts 
concluded that the direct lifecycle greenhouse gas emissions of 
imported sugar based ethanol are 68 percent lower than gasoline, while 
the direct lifecycle greenhouse gas emissions of corn based ethanol 
from the Midwest are 15 to 28 percent lower than gasoline.
  Further research released in 2008 suggests that the lifecycle 
greenhouse gas emissions of corn based ethanol may be higher than 
gasoline, when land use change is factored into the equation.
  The bottom line: biofuels that protect our planet may be produced 
abroad, and we should not put tariffs in front of these fuels, while we 
import crude oil and gasoline tariff free.
  Energy and food prices are both rising at unprecedented rates, and 
there is a great deal of debate about whether the renewable fuels 
standard mandating ethanol use is causing the problem.
  I have always opposed corn ethanol mandates. But I remain concerned 
that the blending subsidy and the ethanol tariff have as much to do 
with rising corn prices as the ethanol mandate.
  Corn ethanol production has considerably exceeded the renewable fuels 
standard every year since its adoption in 2005. With oil prices this 
high, it is profitable to produce ethanol at record corn prices with or 
without the mandate. The low value of renewable fuels standard credits, 
known as RINs, confirms that using ethanol is not a burden for oil 
companies.
  To address the rising cost of corn, we have to address the underlying 
economics of corn ethanol production, and effectively increasing the 
tariff on imports, as the Farm Bill has done, is a step in the wrong 
direction.
  This legislation corrects the Farm Bill's mistaken policy that 
imposed a real trade barrier on clean and climate friendly ethanol 
imports, giving gasoline imports a competitive advantage over cleaner 
fuel that simply should not exist at a time we are trying to combat 
climate change.
  It prevents ethanol producers abroad from receiving American ethanol 
subsidies, which is supposedly the intent of the ethanol tariff.
  I think it strikes the right balance, and I urge Congress to pass 
this legislation.
  Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be 
printed in the Record.

[[Page 11351]]

  There being no objection, the text of the bill was ordered to be 
printed in the Record, as follows:

                                S. 3080

       Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of 
     the United States of America in Congress assembled,

     SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

       This Act may be cited as the ``Imported Ethanol Parity 
     Act''.

     SEC. 2. FINDINGS.

       Congress finds the following:
       (1) On May 6, 2006, the Chairman of the Finance Committee 
     of the Senate stated on the Senate floor that, ``the United 
     States tariff on ethanol operates as an offset to an excise 
     tax credit that applies to both domestically produced and 
     imported ethanol.''.
       (2) On May 9, 2006, the Renewable Fuels Association stated: 
     ``the secondary tariff exists as an offset to the tax 
     incentive gasoline refiners receive for every gallon of 
     ethanol they blend, regardless of the ethanol's origin.''. In 
     May 2008, the Renewable Fuels Association's Executive 
     Director asserted that ``The tariff is there not so much to 
     protect the industry but the United States taxpayer.''.
       (3) In a letter to Congress dated June 20, 2007, the 
     American Coalition for Ethanol, the American Farm Bureau 
     Federation, the National Corn Growers Association, the 
     National Council of Farmer Cooperatives, the National Sorghum 
     Producers, and the Renewable Fuels Association stated that 
     the ``(blender) tax credit is available to refiners 
     regardless of whether the ethanol blended is imported or 
     domestic. To prevent United States taxpayers from subsidizing 
     foreign ethanol companies, Congress passed an offset to the 
     tax credit that foreign companies pay in the form of a 
     tariff.''.
       (4) The Food, Conservation, and Energy Act of 2008, as 
     contained in the Conference Report to accompany H.R. 2419 in 
     the 110th Congress, proposes to decrease the excise tax 
     credit for blending ethanol from $0.51 to $0.45 per gallon, 
     but extend the $0.54 per gallon temporary duty on imported 
     ethanol, increasing the competitive disadvantage of ethanol 
     imports in the United States marketplace. The legislation 
     would transform a tariff designed to offset a domestic 
     subsidy into a real import barrier of at least $0.09 per 
     gallon.
       (5) The State of California is adopting a Low Carbon Fuels 
     Standard that requires a reduction in the lifecycle 
     greenhouse gas emissions from transportation fuels, and the 
     Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007 requires the 
     United States to use increasing quantities of ``advanced 
     biofuels'' that have lifecycle greenhouse gas emissions that 
     are at least 50 percent less than lifecycle greenhouse gas 
     emissions from gasoline.
       (6) The lifecycle greenhouse gas emissions of ethanol vary 
     depending on production methods and feedstocks. These 
     differences will impact the degree to which ethanol may be 
     used to meet ``low-carbon'' fuel requirements under 
     California law and the Energy Independence and Security Act 
     of 2007.
       (7) Sugar cane ethanol plants use biomass from sugar stalks 
     as process energy, resulting in less fossil fuel input 
     compared to current corn-to-ethanol processes.
       (8) The 2007 California Energy Commission Report, entitled 
     ``Full Fuel Cycle Assessment: Well-to-Wheels Energy Inputs, 
     Emissions, and Water Impacts'', concluded that the direct 
     lifecycle greenhouse gas emissions of imported sugar based 
     ethanol are 68 percent lower than gasoline, while the direct 
     lifecycle greenhouse gas emissions of corn based ethanol from 
     the Midwest are 15 to 28 percent lower than gasoline.
       (9) The cost to ship ethanol by sea from foreign production 
     areas to California is competitive with the cost to ship 
     ethanol by rail from the American Midwest, according to 
     ethanol producers and importers.
       (10) Ethanol production will vary from region to region 
     each year based on crop performance, and a global biofuels 
     marketplace would permit mutually beneficial trade between 
     producing regions capable of stabilizing both fuel and food 
     prices.
       (11) In March 2007, the United States and Brazil entered 
     into a strategic alliance to cooperate on advanced research 
     for biofuels, develop biofuel technology, and expand the 
     production and use of biofuels throughout the Western 
     Hemisphere, especially in the Caribbean and Central America.
       (12) On March 9, 2007, President Bush stated ``it's in the 
     interest of the United States that there be a prosperous 
     neighborhood. And one way to help spread prosperity in 
     Central America is for them to become energy producers.''.
       (13) According to a February 2008 study by the 
     Massachusetts Institute of Technology, titled ``Biomass to 
     Ethanol: Potential Production and Environmental Impacts'', 
     the current ethanol distribution system in the United States 
     is not capable of efficiently supplying ethanol to the East 
     Coast markets.

     SEC. 3. ETHANOL TAX PARITY.

       Not later than 30 days after the date of the enactment of 
     this Act, and semiannually thereafter, the President shall 
     reduce the temporary duty imposed on ethanol under subheading 
     9901.00.50 of the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United 
     States by an amount equal to the reduction in any Federal 
     income or excise tax credit under section 40(h), 6426(b), or 
     6427(e)(1) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 and take any 
     other action necessary to ensure that the temporary duty 
     imposed on ethanol under such subheading 9901.00.50 is equal 
     to, or lower than, any Federal income or excise tax credit 
     applicable to ethanol under the Internal Revenue Code of 
     1986.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. KERRY:
  S. 3081. A bill to establish a Petroleum Industry Antitrust Task 
Force within the Department of Justice; to the Committee on the 
Judiciary.
  Mr. KERRY. Mr. President, from the skyrocketing price of crude oil, 
now hovering well above $120 a barrel, to the $4.00 per gallon being 
sold at gas stations across the country, Americans are frustrated and 
there appears to be no end in sight.
  I've talked to school superintendents who have had to cut academic 
programs because the cost of fueling school buses has gone through the 
roof. I have met with constituents who are pleading for the Federal 
Government to take some kind of action to provide relief. Just last 
week, I held a field hearing in Pittsfield, Massachusetts to examine 
how gas prices were impacting small business owners, and the testimony 
was striking. Businesses that have been sustainable for decades are now 
wondering whether they'll be forced to shut their doors for good.
  Congress has received testimony from energy market experts and major 
oil company executives that the price of oil and gas can no longer be 
explained or predicted by normal market dynamics or their historic 
understanding of supply and demand forces. An executive from Exxon 
Mobil recently testified before Congress under oath that the price of 
crude oil should be about $50 to $55 per barrel based on the supply and 
demand fundamentals he had observed. Yet current crude oil prices are 
more than double that.
  We are all owed a clearer understanding as to why prices are so 
disconnected from what normal supply and demand would indicate. Why has 
the price of oil nearly doubled in the last year? Prices should not 
skyrocket like this in a properly functioning, competitive market. 
Twice I have written to the Bush Administration demanding an 
investigation and twice I have received a response of ``we're working 
on it''. Well, this response rings awfully hollow to Americans 
struggling to understand what's going on.
  How the Federal Government responds to the changing dynamics of 
energy markets is vital to our continued national and economic 
security. If the Enron energy crisis taught us anything it is that 
consumers are best protected when energy markets are subject to 
aggressive oversight and enforcement. Unless there is a cop on the beat 
vigilantly policing energy markets--especially when supplies are tight 
in markets with extremely inelastic demand--sophisticated companies can 
fleece consumer pocketbooks without fear of penalty.
  Therefore, I am introducing legislation today to establish a new 
interagency Oil and Gas Market Fraud Task Force under the leadership of 
the Department of Justice to ensure that energy markets are free from 
illegal market manipulation or corporate corruption. This legislation 
will allow us to root out fraud and manipulation in all corners of the 
oil and gas marketplace, and restore consumer confidence. When that 
happens, everyone wins. I urge my colleagues to support this 
legislation.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mrs. McCASKILL (for herself and Mr. Bond):
  S. 3082. A bill to designate the facility of the United States Postal 
Service located at 1700 Cleveland Avenue in Kansas City, Missouri, as 
the ``Reverend Earl Abel Post Office Building''; to the Committee on 
Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs.
  Mrs. McCASKILL. Mr. President, when I was a local elected official in 
Kansas City, MO, I had the distinct honor of getting to know many of 
the dedicated community leaders whose sole purpose for being involved 
was to improve the lives of their fellow citizens. One of the best and 
most beloved of these leaders was the Reverend Earl Abel.

[[Page 11352]]

  Reverend Abel was born on September 12, 1930. He attended University 
of Kansas and went on to receive his Doctor of Divinity Degree from 
Western Baptist Bible College. Reverend Abel worked as a U.S. Postal 
Service mail carrier until he organized the Palestine Missionary 
Baptist Church in 1959.
  Under Reverend Abel's leadership, what started out as a modest church 
of 11 members grew into a thriving ministry, touching the lives of 
thousands of community members across Kansas City, Missouri. While he 
was pastor, Palestine Church built two senior citizens residences, a 
Senior Activity Center, and a church camp for both youth and adults. 
Even as he worked tirelessly to reach out through these programs, 
Reverend Abel's involvement in the community did not end with his 
efforts at Palestine Church. Reverend Abel served as Chaplain for the 
Kansas City Police Department, President of the Baptist Ministers 
Union, member of the Kansas City Council on Crime Prevention, and 
authored a book entitled If a Church is to Grow. In 1999, Missouri 
Governor Mel Carnahan appointed Reverend Abel to the Appellate Judicial 
Commission.
  On May 17, 2005, Reverend Abel passed away after 46 years of service 
at Palestine Missionary Baptist Church of Jesus Christ and more than 48 
years as a minister of God.
  Today I rise to offer a bill to honor this man by naming a post 
office facility in Kansas City after him. Given his early career as a 
mail carrier, it is only fitting for the location at 1700 Cleveland 
Avenue, in the heart of Kansas City, to carry his name. It is my hope 
that this small gesture helps ensure that the legacy of Rev. Abel lives 
on. A companion bill in the House of Representatives will be filed 
today by Rep. Cleaver, a fellow minister and selfless public servant 
who represents Kansas City.
  I hope my fellow colleagues will join me and my colleague Senator 
Bond in recognizing Reverend Earl Abel for his loving ministry and 
limitless dedication to serving the Kansas City, MO, community.
  Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be 
printed in the Record.
  There being no objection, the text of the bill was ordered to be 
printed in the Record, as follows:

                                S. 3082

       Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of 
     the United States of America in Congress assembled,

     SECTION 1. REVEREND EARL ABEL POST OFFICE BUILDING.

       (a) Designation.--The facility of the United States Postal 
     Service located at 1700 Cleveland Avenue in Kansas City, 
     Missouri, shall be known and designated as the ``Reverend 
     Earl Abel Post Office Building''.
       (b) References.--Any reference in a law, map, regulation, 
     document, paper, or other record of the United States to the 
     facility referred to in subsection (a) shall be deemed to be 
     a reference to the ``Reverend Earl Abel Post Office 
     Building''.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. BROWN (for himself, Mr. Dorgan, Mr. Feingold, Mr. Casey, 
        and Mr. Whitehouse):
  S. 3083. A bill to require a review of existing trade agreements and 
renegotiation of existing trade agreements based on the review, to set 
terms for future trade agreements, to express the sense of the Senate 
that the role of Congress in trade policymaking should be strengthened, 
and for other purposes; to the Committee on Finance.
  Mr. BROWN. Mr. President, the goal of our trade policy should be to 
promote fair competition and lift up workers at home and abroad.
  Americans support trade that allows responsible businesses to thrive, 
fueling good-paying jobs and a strong, resilient economy.
  But wrong-headed trade pacts following the failed NAFTA-model have 
betrayed middle class families across the country, destabilizing our 
economy and destroying communities in rural and urban areas alike.
  In my state of Ohio, more than 200,000 manufacturing jobs have been 
eliminated since 2001. Across the country, more than 3 million 
manufacturing jobs have been eliminated in that time.
  Our failures to modernize our Nation's trade policy, to learn from 
our mistakes, and to respond to changing dynamics in the global arena, 
hurt communities like Toledo and Steubenville and Dayton.
  That is why voters in my state of Ohio and across the country have 
sent a message loud and clear demanding a new direction, a very 
different direction, for our nation's trade policy.
  Over the last 8 years, our approach to trade has been haphazard at 
best.
  In the last 2 years, since voters elected candidates who support fair 
trade, Congress has reasserted itself in trade policy-making, with some 
improvements to proposed deals with Peru, Panama, Colombia, and South 
Korea.
  We also have chosen not to grant President Bush a renewal of Fast 
Track.
  But our approach to trade has not evolved from reactive to proactive. 
We have not forged a new approach to trade that is results-oriented, an 
approach focused squarely on the goals of economic strength, job 
creation, and U.S. self-sufficiency.
  Not surprisingly, polls show that Americans reject current trade 
policy as misguided.
  That is because it is.
  It is time to learn from our mistakes.
  It is time for a change. The Trade Reform, Accountability, 
Development and Employment, TRADE, Act, which Senator Dorgan, Senator 
Feingold, Senator Casey, Senator Whitehouse and I are introducing 
today, is a step towards that change.
  This legislation will serve as a template for how to craft a trade 
agreement that works for workers, for business owners, for our country.
  This legislation will mandate a review of all existing trade 
agreements and will require the President to submit renegotiation plans 
for those agreements before pursuing new trade agreements.
  The TRADE Act will create a committee comprised of House and Senate 
leaders who will review the President's plan for renegotiation.
  This bill spells out standards for future trade agreements, standards 
based on fostering fair competition, promoting good-paying jobs, and 
addressing unethical behavior by multinational corporations, including 
the exploitation of people and natural resources in developing nations.
  Trade is an exchange that relies on the integrity of its 
participants. We must not trade away our fundamental belief in basic 
human rights and our responsibility to fight the kind of exploitation 
that threatens vulnerable peoples and vulnerable nations.
  That is why our trade policy must not sidestep the impact of lax 
trade agreements and unethical corporations on developing nations.
  The TRADE Act also sets out criteria for a new negotiating process--
one that would do away with the fundamentally-flawed Fast Track process 
and return power to Congress when considering our nation's trade pacts.
  We take for granted our clean air, safe food, and safe drinking 
water. But these blessings are not by chance: they result from laws and 
rules that foster fair wages, protect the public health, and promote 
environmental stewardship.
  Flawed trade policy accelerates the import of toxic toys, 
contaminated toothpaste, and poisonous pet food into this country.
  It does not have to be this way.
  We have a choice.
  We can continue a race to the bottom in wages, worker safety, 
environmental protection, and health standards.
  Or, we can use trade agreements to lift standards abroad--not 
threaten workers and consumers.
  We can continue down the path of the failed NAFTA model, or we can 
write trade agreements that sustain and grow our Nation's manufacturing 
self-sufficiency, create good-paying jobs and reduce the trade deficit 
by providing fair and transparent market access.
  We can forsake U.S. standards and U.S. values and ignore trade abuses 
in order to mass produce trade agreements, or we can write trade 
agreements that fulfill their promises, that hold our trading partners 
accountable for abiding by the rules, and that build

[[Page 11353]]

on the hard-fought battles waged to build a strong middle class, reward 
good corporate citizens, preserve our natural resources, and ensure 
that the food and products Americans purchase are safe.
  We can continue to use trade deals to lock in protections for Wall 
Street, the drug companies, and oil companies, or we can create a 
predictable structure for international trade without providing 
corporations with overreaching privileges and rights of private 
enforcement that undermine our laws.
  Middle class families, American manufacturers and farmers, and 
community leaders across the country all know that we need a new 
direction for trade.
  I am going to ask my leadership, and my caucus, to work with me on 
this legislation. And I look forward to working with my allies on the 
other side of the aisle to modernize U.S. trade policy.
  Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be 
printed in the Record.
  There being no objection, the text of the bill was ordered to be 
printed in the Record, as follows:

                                S. 3083

       Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of 
     the United States of America in Congress assembled,

     SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

       This Act may be cited as the ``Trade Reform, 
     Accountability, Development, and Employment Act of 2008'' or 
     the ``TRADE Act of 2008''.

     SEC. 2. DEFINITIONS.

       In this Act:
       (1) Core labor standards.--The term ``core labor 
     standards'' means the core labor rights as stated in the 
     International Labour Organization conventions dealing with--
       (A) freedom of association and the effective recognition of 
     the right to collective bargaining;
       (B) the elimination of all forms of forced or compulsory 
     labor;
       (C) the effective abolition of child labor; and
       (D) the elimination of discrimination with respect to 
     employment and occupation.
       (2) Multilateral environmental agreements.--The term 
     ``multilateral environmental agreements'' means any 
     international agreement or provision thereof to which the 
     United States is a party and which is intended to protect, or 
     has the effect of protecting, the environment or human 
     health.
       (3) Trade agreements.--
       (A) In general.--The term ``trade agreement'' includes the 
     following:
       (i) The United States-Australia Free Trade Agreement.
       (ii) The United States-Morocco Free Trade Agreement.
       (iii) The United States-Singapore Free Trade Agreement.
       (iv) The United States-Chile Free Trade Agreement 
     Implementation Act.
       (v) The North American Free Trade Agreement.
       (vi) The Agreement between the United States of America and 
     the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan on the Establishment of a 
     Free Trade Area.
       (vii) The Dominican Republic-Central America-United States 
     Free Trade Agreement Implementation Act.
       (viii) The United States-Bahrain Free Trade Agreement 
     Implementation Act.
       (ix) The United States-Oman Free Trade Agreement 
     Implementation Act.
       (x) The Agreement on the Establishment of a Free Trade Area 
     between the Government of the United States of America and 
     the Government of Israel.
       (xi) The United States-Peru Trade Promotion Agreement.
       (B) Uruguay round agreements.--The term ``trade agreement'' 
     includes the following Uruguay Round Agreements:
       (i) The General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT 1994) 
     annexed to the WTO Agreement.
       (ii) The WTO Agreement described in section 2(9) of the 
     Uruguay Round Agreements Act (19 U.S.C. 3501(9)).
       (iii) The agreements described in section 101(d) of the 
     Uruguay Round Agreements Act (19 U.S.C. 3511(d)).
       (iv) Any multilateral agreement entered into by the United 
     States under the auspices of the World Trade Organization 
     dealing with information technology, telecommunications, or 
     financial services.

     SEC. 3. REVIEW AND REPORT ON EXISTING TRADE AGREEMENTS.

       (a) Review and Report.--
       (1) In general.--Not later than June 30, 2010, the 
     Comptroller General of the United States shall conduct a 
     review of all trade agreements described in section 2(3) and 
     submit to the Congressional Trade Agreement Review Committee 
     established under section 6 a report that includes the 
     information described under subsections (b) and (c) and the 
     recommendations required under subsection (d). The review 
     shall concentrate on the effective operation of the United 
     States trade agreements program generally.
       (2) Cooperation of agencies.--The Department of State, the 
     Department of Agriculture, the Department of Commerce, the 
     Department of Labor, the Department of the Treasury, the 
     United States Trade Representative, and other executive 
     departments and agencies shall cooperate with the Comptroller 
     General and the Government Accountability Office in providing 
     access to United States Government officials and documents to 
     facilitate preparation of the report.
       (b) Information With Respect to Trade Agreements.--The 
     report required by subsection (a) shall, with respect to each 
     trade agreement described in section 2(3), to the extent 
     practical, include the following information covering the 
     period between the date on which the agreement entered into 
     force with respect to the United States and the date on which 
     the Comptroller General completes the review:
       (1) An analysis of indicators of the economic impact of 
     each trade agreement, such as--
       (A) the dollar value of goods exported from the United 
     States and imported into the United States by sector and 
     year;
       (B) the employment effects of the agreement on job gains 
     and losses in the United States by sector and changes in wage 
     levels in the United States in dollars by sector and year; 
     and
       (C) the rate of production, number of employees, and 
     competitive position of industries in the United States 
     significantly affected by the agreement.
       (2) A trend analysis of wage levels on a year-to-year basis 
     in--
       (A) each country with which the United States has a trade 
     agreement described in section 2(3)(A);
       (B) each country that is a major United States trading 
     partner, including Belgium, Brazil, China, France, Germany, 
     Hong Kong, India, Ireland, Italy, Japan, South Korea, 
     Malaysia, Netherlands, Taiwan, and the United Kingdom;
       (C) each country with which the United States has 
     considered establishing a free trade agreement, including 
     South Africa and Thailand;
       (D) each country with respect to which the United States 
     has extended preferential trade treatment under the Caribbean 
     Basin Economic Recovery Act (19 U.S.C. 2701 et seq.) and the 
     Andean Trade Preference Act (19 U.S.C. 3201 et seq.).
       (3) The effect on agriculture, including--
       (A) the trend of prices in the United States for 
     agricultural commodities and food products that are imported 
     into the United States from a country that is a party to an 
     agreement described in section 2(3);
       (B) an analysis of the effects, if any, on the cost of farm 
     programs in the United States; and
       (C) the number of farms operating in the United States and 
     the number of acres under production for agricultural 
     commodities that are exported from the United States to a 
     country that is a party to such an agreement on a year-by-
     year basis.
       (4) An analysis of the progress in implementing trade 
     agreement commitments and the record of compliance with the 
     terms of each agreement in effect between the United States 
     and a country listed in paragraph (2).
       (5) A description of any outstanding disputes between the 
     United States and any country that is a party to an agreement 
     listed in section 2(3), including a description of laws, 
     regulations, or policies of the United States or any State 
     that any country that is a party to such an agreement has 
     challenged, or threatened to challenge, under such agreement.
       (6) An analysis of the ability of the United States to 
     ensure that any country with which the United States has a 
     trade agreement described in section 2(3) complies with 
     United States laws and regulations, including--
       (A) complying with the customs laws of the United States;
       (B) making timely payment of duties owed on goods imported 
     into the United States;
       (C) meeting safety and inspection requirements with respect 
     to food and other products imported into the United States; 
     and
       (D) complying with prohibitions on the transshipment of 
     goods that are ultimately imported into the United States.
       (7) A analysis of any privatization of public sector 
     services in the United States or in any country that is a 
     party to the an agreement listed in section 2(3), including 
     any effect such privatization has on the access of consumers 
     to essential services, such as health care, electricity, gas, 
     water, telephone service, or other utilities.
       (8) An assessment of the impact of the intellectual 
     property provisions of the trade agreements listed in section 
     2(3) on access to medicines.
       (9) An analysis of contracts for the procurement of goods 
     or services by Federal or State government agencies from 
     persons operating in any country that is a party to an 
     agreement listed in section 2(3).

[[Page 11354]]

       (10) An assessment of the consequences of significant 
     currency movements and a determination of whether the 
     currency of a country that is a party to an agreement is 
     misaligned deliberately to promote a competitive advantage in 
     international trade for that country.
       (c) Information on Countries That Are Parties to Trade 
     Agreements.--With respect to each country with respect to 
     which the United States has a trade agreement in effect, the 
     report required under subsection (a) shall include 
     information regarding whether that country--
       (1) has a democratic form of government;
       (2) respects core labor standards, as defined by the 
     Committee of Experts on the Application of Conventions and 
     Recommendations and the Conference Committee on the 
     Application of Standards of the International Labour 
     Organization;
       (3) respects fundamental human rights, as determined by the 
     Secretary of State in the annual country reports on human 
     rights of the Department of State;
       (4) is designated as a country of particular concern with 
     respect to religious freedom under section 402(b)(1) of the 
     International Religious Freedom Act of 1998 (22 U.S.C. 
     6442(b)(1));
       (5) is on a list described in subparagraph (B) or (C) of 
     section 110(b)(1) of the Trafficking Victims Protection Act 
     of 2000 (22 U.S.C. 7107(b)(1)) (commonly known as tier 2 or 
     tier 3 of the Trafficking in Persons List of the Department 
     of State);
       (6) has taken effective measures to combat and prevent 
     public and private corruption, including measures with 
     respect to tax evasion and money laundering;
       (7) complies with the multilateral environmental agreements 
     to which the country is a party;
       (8) has in force adequate labor and environmental laws and 
     regulations, has devoted sufficient resources to implementing 
     such laws and regulations, and has an adequate record of 
     enforcement of such law and regulations;
       (9) adequately protects intellectual property rights;
       (10) provides for governmental transparency, due process of 
     law, and respect for international agreements;
       (11) provides procedures to promote basic democratic 
     rights, including the right to hold clear title to property 
     and the right to a free press; and
       (12) poses potential concerns to the national security of 
     the United States, including an assessment of transfer of 
     technology, production, and services from one country to 
     another.
       (d) Recommendations.--Each report required under subsection 
     (a) shall include recommendations of the Comptroller General 
     for addressing the problems with respect to an agreement 
     identified under subsections (b) and (c). The recommendations 
     shall include suggestions for renegotiating the agreement 
     based on the requirements described in section 4(b) and for 
     negotiations with respect to new trade agreements.
       (e) Citations.--The Comptroller General shall include in 
     the report required under subsection (a) citations to the 
     sources of data used in preparing the report and a 
     description of the methodologies employed in preparing the 
     report.
       (f) Public Comment.--In preparing each report required 
     under subsection (a), the Comptroller General shall--
       (1) hold at least 2 hearings that are open to the public; 
     and
       (2) provide an opportunity for members of the public to 
     testify and submit written comments.
       (g) Public Availability.--The report required under 
     subsection (a) shall be made available to the public not 
     later than 14 days after the Comptroller General completes 
     that report.

     SEC. 4. INCLUSION OF CERTAIN PROVISIONS IN TRADE AGREEMENTS.

       (a) In General.--Notwithstanding section 151 of the Trade 
     Act of 1974 (19 U.S.C. 2191) or any other provision of law, 
     any bill implementing a trade agreement between the United 
     States and another country that is introduced in Congress 
     after the date of the enactment of this Act shall be subject 
     to a point of order pursuant to subsection (c) unless the 
     trade agreement meets the requirements described in 
     subsection (b).
       (b) Requirements.--Each trade agreement negotiated between 
     the United States and another country shall meet the 
     following requirements:
       (1) Labor standards.--The labor provisions shall--
       (A) be included in the text of the agreement;
       (B) require that a country that is party to the agreement 
     adopt and maintain as part of its domestic law and 
     regulations (including in any designated zone in that 
     country), the core labor standards and effectively enforce 
     laws directly related to those standards and to acceptable 
     conditions of work with respect to minimum wages, hours of 
     work, and occupational safety and health;
       (C) prohibit a country that is a party to the agreement 
     from waiving or otherwise derogating from its laws and 
     regulations relating to the core labor standards and 
     acceptable conditions of work with respect to minimum wages, 
     hours of work, and occupational safety and health;
       (D) require each country that is a party to the agreement 
     to adopt into domestic law and enforce effectively core labor 
     standards;
       (E) provide that failures to meet the labor standards 
     required by the agreement shall be subject to dispute 
     resolution and enforcement mechanisms and penalties that are 
     at least as effective as the mechanisms and penalties that 
     apply to the commercial provisions of the agreement;
       (F) strengthen the capacity of each country that is a party 
     to the agreement to promote and enforce core labor standards; 
     and
       (G) establish a commission of independent experts who shall 
     receive, review, and adjudicate any complaint filed under the 
     labor provisions of the trade agreement, and vest the 
     commission with the authority to establish objective 
     indicators to determine compliance with the obligations set 
     forth in subparagraphs (B), (C), (D), (E), and (F).
       (2) Environmental and public safety standards.--The 
     environmental provisions shall--
       (A) be included in the text of the agreement;
       (B) prohibit each country that is a party to the agreement 
     from weakening, eliminating, or failing to enforce domestic 
     environmental or other public safety standards to promote 
     trade or attract investment;
       (C) require each such country to implement and enforce 
     fully and effectively, including through domestic law, the 
     country's obligations under multilateral environmental 
     agreements and provide for the enforcement of such 
     obligations under the agreement;
       (D) prohibit the trade of products that are illegally 
     harvested or extracted and the trade of goods derived from 
     illegally harvested or extracted natural resources, including 
     timber and timber products, fish, wildlife, and associated 
     products, mineral resources, or other environmentally 
     sensitive goods;
       (E) provide that the failure to meet the environmental 
     standards required by the agreement be subject to dispute 
     resolution and enforcement mechanisms and penalties that are 
     at least as effective as the mechanisms and penalties that 
     apply to the commercial provisions of the agreement; and
       (F) allow each country that is a party to the agreement to 
     adopt and implement environmental, health, and safety 
     standards, recognizing the legitimate right of governments to 
     protect the environment and public health and safety.
       (3) Food and product health and safety standards.--If the 
     agreement contains health and safety standards for food and 
     other products, the agreement shall--
       (A) establish that food, feed, food ingredients, and other 
     related food products may be imported into the United States 
     from a country that is a party to the agreement only if such 
     products meet or exceed United States standards with respect 
     to food safety, pesticides, inspections, packaging, and 
     labeling;
       (B) establish that nonfood products may be imported into 
     the United States from a country  that is a party to the 
     agreement only if such products meet or exceed United States 
     health and safety standards with respect to health and 
     safety, inspection, packaging and labeling;
       (C) allow each country  that is a party to the agreement to 
     impose standards designed to protect public health and safety 
     unless it can be clearly demonstrated that such standards do 
     not protect the public health or safety;
       (D) authorize the Commissioner of the Food and Drug 
     Administration (in this Act, referred to as the 
     ``Commissioner'') and the Consumer Product Safety Commission 
     (in this Act, referred to as the ``Commission'') to assess 
     the regulatory system of each country  that is a party to the 
     agreement to determine whether the system provides the same 
     or better protection of health and safety for food and other 
     products as provided under the regulatory system of the 
     United States;
       (E) if the Commissioner or the Commission determines that 
     the regulatory system of such a country does not provide the 
     same or better protection of health and safety for food and 
     other products as provided under the regulatory system of the 
     United States, prohibit the importation into the United 
     States of food and other products from that country;
       (F) provide a process by which producers from countries 
     whose standards are not found by the Commissioner or the 
     Commission to meet United States standards may have their 
     facilities inspected and certified in order to allow products 
     from approved facilities to be imported into the United 
     States;
       (G) if harmonization of food or product health or safety 
     standards is necessary to facilitate trade, such 
     harmonization shall be based on standards that are no less 
     stringent than United States standards; and
       (H) establish mandatory end-use labeling of imports of milk 
     protein concentrates.
       (4) Services provisions.--If the agreement contains 
     provisions related to the provision of services, such 
     provisions shall--
       (A) preserve the right of Federal, State, and local 
     governments to maintain essential

[[Page 11355]]

     public services and to regulate, for the benefit of the 
     public, services provided to consumers in the United States 
     by establishing a general exception to the national treatment 
     commitments in the agreement that allows distinctions between 
     United States and foreign service providers and 
     qualifications or limitations on the provision of services;
       (B)(i) require each country that is a party to the 
     agreement to establish a list of each service sector that 
     will be subject to the obligations of the country under the 
     agreement; and
       (ii) apply the agreement only to the service sectors that 
     are on the list described in clause (i);
       (C) establish a general exception to market access 
     obligations that allows a country that is a party to the 
     agreement to maintain or establish a ban on services the 
     country considers harmful, if the ban is applied to domestic 
     and foreign services and service providers alike;
       (D) require service providers in any country that is a 
     party to the agreement that provide services to consumers in 
     the United States to comply with United States privacy, 
     transparency, professional qualification, and consumer access 
     laws and regulations;
       (E) require that services provided to consumers in the 
     United States that are subject to privacy laws and 
     regulations in the United States may only be provided by 
     service providers in other countries that provide privacy 
     protections and protections for confidential information that 
     are equal to or exceed the protections provided by United 
     States privacy laws and regulations;
       (F) require that financial and medical services be subject 
     to United States privacy laws and be performed only in 
     countries that provide protections for confidential 
     information that are equal to or exceed the protections for 
     such information under United States privacy laws;
       (G) not require the privatization of public services in any 
     country that is a party to the agreement, including services 
     related to national security, social security, health, public 
     safety, education, water, sanitation, other utilities, ports, 
     or transportation; and
       (H) provide for local governments to operate without being 
     subject to market access obligations under the agreement.
       (5) Investment provisions.--If the agreement contains 
     provisions related to investment, such provisions shall--
       (A) preserve the ability of each country that is a party to 
     the agreement to regulate foreign investment in a manner 
     consistent with the needs and priorities of the country;
       (B) allow each such country to place reasonable 
     restrictions on speculative capital to reduce global 
     financial instability and trade volatility;
       (C) not be subject to an investor-state dispute settlement 
     mechanism under the agreement;
       (D) ensure that foreign investors operating in the United 
     States have rights no greater than the rights provided to 
     domestic investors by the Constitution of the United States;
       (E) provide for government-to-government dispute resolution 
     relating to a government action that destroys all value of 
     the real property of a foreign investor rather than dispute 
     resolution between the government that took the action and 
     the foreign investor;
       (F) define the term ``investment'' to mean not more than a 
     commitment of capital or acquisition of real property and not 
     to include assumption of risk or expectation of gain or 
     profit;
       (G) define the term ``investor'' to mean only a person who 
     makes a commitment or acquisition described in subparagraph 
     (F);
       (H) define the term ``direct expropriation'' as government 
     action that does not merely diminish the value of property 
     but destroys all value of the property permanently;
       (I) not provide a dispute resolution system under the 
     agreement for the enforcement of contracts between foreign 
     investors and the government of a country that is a party to 
     the agreement relating to natural resources, public works, or 
     other activities under government control; and
       (J) define the standard of minimum treatment to provide no 
     greater legal rights than United States citizens possess 
     under the due process clause of section 1 of the 14th 
     amendment to the Constitution of the United States.
       (6) Procurement standards.--If the agreement contains 
     government procurement provisions, such provisions shall--
       (A) require each country that is a party to the agreement 
     to establish a list of industry sectors, goods, or services 
     that will be subject to the national treatment and other 
     obligations of the country under the agreement;
       (B) with respect to the United States, apply only to State 
     and local governments that specifically agree to the 
     agreement and only to the industry sectors, goods, or 
     services specifically identified by the State government and 
     not apply to local governments; and
       (C) include only technical specifications for goods or 
     services, or supplier qualifications or other conditions for 
     receiving government contracts that do not undermine--
       (i) prevailing wage policies;
       (ii) recycled content policies;
       (iii) sustainable harvest policies;
       (iv) renewable energy policies;
       (v) human rights; or
       (vi) labor project agreements.
       (7) Intellectual property requirements.--If the agreement 
     contains provisions related to the protection of intellectual 
     property rights, such provisions shall--
       (A) promote adequate and effective protection of 
     intellectual property rights;
       (B) include only terms relating to patents that do not, 
     overtly or in application, limit the flexibilities and rights 
     established in the Declaration on the TRIPS Agreement and 
     Public Health, adopted by the World Trade Organization at the 
     Fourth Ministerial Conference at Doha, Qatar on November 14, 
     2001; and
       (C) require that any provisions relating to the patenting 
     of traditional knowledge be consistent with the Convention on 
     Biological Diversity, concluded at Rio de Janeiro June 5, 
     1992.
       (8) Agricultural standards.--If the agreement contains 
     provisions related to agriculture, such provisions shall--
       (A) protect the right of each such country to establish 
     policies with respect to food and agriculture that require 
     farmers to receive fair remuneration for management and labor 
     that occurs on farms and that allow for inventory management 
     and strategic food and renewable energy reserves, to the 
     extent that such policies do not contribute to or allow the 
     dumping of agricultural commodities in world markets at 
     prices lower than the cost of production;
       (B) protect the right of each country that is a party to 
     the agreement to prevent dumping of agricultural commodities 
     at below the cost of production through border regulations or 
     other mechanisms and policies;
       (C) ensure that all laws relating to antitrust and anti-
     competitive business practices remain fully in effect, and 
     that their enforceability is neither pre-empted nor 
     compromised in any manner;
       (D) ensure adequate supplies of safe food for consumers;
       (E) protect the right of each country that is a party to 
     the agreement to encourage conservation through the use of 
     best practices with respect to the management and production 
     of crops; and
       (F) ensure fair treatment of farm laborers in each such 
     country.
       (9) Trade remedies and safeguards.--If the agreement 
     contains trade remedy provisions, such provisions shall--
       (A) preserve fully the ability of the United States to 
     enforce its trade laws, including antidumping and 
     countervailing duty laws and safeguard laws;
       (B) ensure the continued effectiveness of domestic and 
     international prohibitions on unfair trade, especially 
     prohibitions on dumping and subsidies, and domestic and 
     international safeguard provisions;
       (C) allow the United States to maintain adequate safeguards 
     to ensure that surges of imported goods do not result in 
     economic burdens on workers, firms, or farmers in the United 
     States, including providing that such safeguards go into 
     effect automatically based on certain criteria; and
       (D) if the currency of a country that is a party to the 
     agreement is deliberately misaligned, establish safeguard 
     remedies that apply automatically to offset substantial and 
     sustained currency movements.
       (10) Rules of origin provisions.--If the agreement contains 
     provisions related to rules of origin, such provisions 
     shall--
       (A) ensure, to the fullest extent practicable, that goods 
     receiving preferential treatment under the agreement are 
     produced using inputs from a country that is a party to the 
     agreement; and
       (B) ensure the effective enforcement of such provisions.
       (11) Dispute resolution and enforcement provisions.--If the 
     agreement contains provisions related to dispute resolution, 
     such provisions shall--
       (A) incorporate the basic due process guarantees protected 
     by the Constitution of the United States, including access to 
     documents, open hearings, and conflict of interest rules for 
     judges;
       (B) require that any dispute settlement panel, including an 
     appellate panel, dealing with intellectual property rights or 
     environmental, health, labor, and other public law issues 
     include panelists with expertise in such issues; and
       (C) provide that dispute resolution proceedings are open to 
     the public and provide timely public access to information 
     regarding enforcement, disputes, and ongoing negotiations 
     related to disputes.
       (12) Technical assistance.--If the agreement contains 
     technical assistance provisions, such provisions shall--
       (A) be designed to raise standards in developing countries 
     by providing assistance that ensures respect for diversity of 
     development paths;
       (B) be designed to empower civil society and democratic 
     governments to create sustainable, vibrant economies and 
     respect basic rights;
       (C) provide that technical assistance shall not supplant 
     economic assistance; and

[[Page 11356]]

       (D) promote the exportation of goods produced with methods 
     that support sustainable natural resources.
       (13) Exceptions for national security and other reasons.--
     Each agreement shall--
       (A) include an essential security exception that permits a 
     country that is a party to the agreement to apply measures 
     that the country considers necessary for the maintenance or 
     restoration of international peace or security, or the 
     protection of its own essential security interests, including 
     regarding infrastructure, services, manufacturing, and other 
     sectors; and
       (B) include in its list of general exceptions the following 
     language: ``Notwithstanding any other provision of this 
     agreement, a provision of law that is nondiscriminatory on 
     its face and relates to domestic health, consumer safety, the 
     environment, labor rights, worker health and safety, economic 
     equity, consumer access, the provision of goods or services, 
     or investment, shall not be subject to challenge under the 
     dispute resolution mechanism established under this 
     agreement, unless the primary purpose of the law is to 
     discriminate with respect to market access.''.
       (14) Federalism.--The agreement may only require a State 
     government to comply with procurement, investment, or 
     services provisions contained in the agreement if the State 
     government has been consulted in full and has given explicit 
     consent to be bound by such provisions.
       (c) Point of Order in Senate.--The Senate shall cease 
     consideration of a bill to implement a trade agreement if--
       (1) a point of order is made by any Senator against the 
     bill based on the noncompliance of the trade agreement with 
     the requirements of subsection (b); and
       (2) the point of order is sustained by the Presiding 
     Officer.
       (d) Waivers and Appeals.--
       (1) Waivers.--Before the Presiding Officer rules on a point 
     of order described in subsection (c), any Senator may move to 
     waive the point of order and the motion to waive shall not be 
     subject to amendment. A point of order described in 
     subsection (c) is waived only by the affirmative vote of 60 
     Members of the Senate, duly chosen and sworn.
       (2) Appeals.--After the Presiding Officer rules on a point 
     of order described in subsection (c), any Senator may appeal 
     the ruling of the Presiding Officer on the point of order as 
     it applies to some or all of the provisions on which the 
     Presiding Officer ruled. A ruling of the Presiding Officer on 
     a point of order described in subsection (c) is sustained 
     unless 60 Members of the Senate, duly chosen and sworn, vote 
     not to sustain the ruling.
       (3) Debate.--Debate on the motion to waive under paragraph 
     (1) or on an appeal of the ruling of the Presiding Officer 
     under paragraph (2) shall be limited to 1 hour. The time 
     shall be equally divided between, and controlled by, the 
     majority leader and the minority leader of the Senate, or 
     their designees.

     SEC. 5. RENEGOTIATION PLAN FOR EXISTING TRADE AGREEMENTS.

       The President shall submit to Congress a plan to bring 
     trade agreements in effect on the date of the enactment of 
     this Act into compliance with the requirements of section 
     4(b) not later than 90 days before the earlier of the day on 
     which the President--
       (1) initiates negotiations with a foreign country with 
     respect to a new trade agreement; or
       (2) submits a bill to Congress to implement a trade 
     agreement.

     SEC. 6. ESTABLISHMENT OF CONGRESSIONAL TRADE AGREEMENT REVIEW 
                   COMMITTEE.

       (a) Establishment.--There is established a Congressional 
     Trade Agreement Review Committee.
       (b) Functions.--The Committee--
       (1) shall receive the report of the Comptroller General of 
     the United States required under section 3;
       (2) shall review the plan for bringing trade agreements 
     into compliance with the requirements of section 4(b); and
       (3) may, not later than 60 days after receiving the plan 
     described in paragraph (2), add items for renegotiation to 
     the plan, reject recommendations in the plan, or otherwise 
     amend the plan by a vote of \2/3\ of the members of the 
     Committee.
       (c) Appointment and Membership.--The Committee shall be 
     composed of the chairman and ranking members of the 
     following:
       (1) The Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry 
     of the Senate.
       (2) The Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs of 
     the Senate.
       (3) The Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation 
     of the Senate.
       (4) The Committee on Energy and Natural Resources of the 
     Senate.
       (5) The Committee on Environment and Public Works of the 
     Senate.
       (6) The Committee on Finance of the Senate.
       (7) The Committee on Foreign Relations of the Senate.
       (8) The Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions 
     of the Senate.
       (9) The Committee on the Judiciary of the Senate.
       (10) The Committee on Small Business and Entrepreneurship 
     of the Senate.
       (11) The Committee on Agriculture of the House of 
     Representatives.
       (12) The Committee on Education and Labor of the House of 
     Representatives.
       (13) The Committee on Energy and Commerce of the House of 
     Representatives.
       (14) The Committee on Financial Services of the House of 
     Representatives.
       (15) The Committee on Foreign Affairs of the House of 
     Representatives.
       (16) The Committee on the Judiciary of the House of 
     Representatives.
       (17) The Committee on Natural Resources of the House of 
     Representatives.
       (18) The Committee on Small Business of the House of 
     Representatives.
       (19) The Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure of 
     the House of Representatives.
       (20) The Committee on Ways and Means of the House of 
     Representatives.

     SEC. 7. SENSE OF CONGRESS REGARDING READINESS CRITERIA AND 
                   IMPROVING THE PROCESS FOR UNITED STATES TRADE 
                   NEGOTIATIONS.

       It is the sense of Congress that if Congress considers 
     legislation to provide for special procedures for the 
     consideration of bills to implement trade agreements, that 
     legislation shall include--
       (1) criteria for the President to use in determining 
     whether a country--
       (A) is able to meet its obligations under a trade 
     agreement;
       (B) meets the requirements described in section 3(c); and
       (C) is an appropriate country with which to enter into a 
     trade agreement;
       (2) a process by which the Committee on Finance of the 
     Senate and the Committee on Ways and Means of the House of 
     Representatives review the determination of the President 
     described in paragraph (1) to verify that the country meets 
     the criteria;
       (3) requirements for consultation with Congress during 
     trade negotiations that require more frequent consultations 
     than required by the Bipartisan Trade Promotion Authority Act 
     of 2002 (19 U.S.C. 3801 et seq.), including a process for 
     consultation with any committee of Congress with jurisdiction 
     over any area covered by the negotiations;
       (4) binding negotiating objectives and requirements 
     outlining what must and must not be included in a trade 
     agreement, including the requirements described in section 
     4(b);
       (5) a process for review and certification by Congress to 
     ensure that the negotiating objectives described in paragraph 
     (4) have been met during the negotiations;
       (6) a process--
       (A) by which a State may give informed consent to be bound 
     by nontariff provisions in a trade agreement that relate to 
     investment, the service sector, and procurement; and
       (B) that prevents a State from being bound by the 
     provisions described in subparagraph (A) if the State has not 
     consented; and
       (7) a requirement that a trade agreement be approved by a 
     majority vote in both Houses of Congress before the President 
     may sign the agreement.

                          ____________________