[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 157 (2011), Part 11]
[House]
[Pages 15287-15292]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




            EXTENDING THE GENERALIZED SYSTEM OF PREFERENCES

  Mr. CAMP. Madam Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that the Speaker may 
postpone further proceedings on the motion to concur in the Senate 
amendment to H.R. 2832 as though under clause 8(a)(1)(A) of rule XX.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the 
gentleman from Michigan?
  There was no objection.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to clause 1(c) of rule XIX, further 
consideration of the motion to concur in the Senate amendment to the 
bill (H.R. 2832) to extend the Generalized System of Preferences, and 
for other purposes, will now resume.
  The Clerk read the title of the bill.
  Mr. CAMP. At this time, Madam Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to a 
distinguished member of the Ways and Means Committee, the gentlewoman 
from Kansas (Ms. Jenkins).
  Ms. JENKINS. I thank the chair for yielding.
  Three and a half trade deals that we have taken up today have 
bipartisan support, the three pending free trade agreements and the GSP 
extension within this bill. Both parties in both Chambers agree that 
these important trade pacts will grow our economy, create jobs, and 
make America more competitive in the global marketplace.
  Sadly, however, the bipartisan, bicameral approval of the merits of 
these trade deals did not keep the Washington gamesmanship at bay. For 
nearly 10 months, as they pushed for an expanded and enlarged TAA 
program, our colleagues in the Senate allowed the GSP to lapse, holding 
American jobs hostage until their political allies could be pacified 
with a sufficient payoff.
  This delay wasn't simply an intellectual exercise either. It hurt 
real businesses, real families, and cost us real jobs in my home State 
of Kansas. Take the Berger Company in Atchison, Kansas. The family-
owned Berger Company manufactures leather goods for sale across the 
United States. But due to the increased cost of materials caused by the 
lapse in the GSP, Berger has lost customers to foreign competitors like 
China, causing lower profit and placing real Kansas jobs at risk.
  I'm voting for this bill because we need GSP to be reauthorized 
immediately, but I'm extremely disappointed that Senate Democrats have 
again risked the continued lapse of this important program all for a 
TAA program that does not work.
  The results of Washington brinksmanship have real life impacts across 
this country. So while I'm hopeful that we will finally extend the GSP 
package today, I'm disappointed Washington political games made our 
small businesses, like the Berger Company, wait so long.
  Mr. McDERMOTT. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may 
consume.
  I rise to express my strong support for H.R. 2832, which is extending 
what have been historically two programs that have received strong 
bipartisan support. Beginning in 1962, the TAA bill was originally put 
in under the Kennedy administration, and it has been extended for all 
these years. And the Generalized System of Preferences has also been 
there for a long time. Our importers and exporters have been using it 
as ways of getting things into the United States that have made real 
differences not only for our people but for people in developing 
countries.
  Now, TAA provides critically needed assistance to workers who lose 
their jobs as a result of trade. It would be hard to find anybody on 
the floor of the House who wouldn't say that trade causes displacement 
of workers. There are jobs that move here, move there, and this is a 
recognition of that and a statement that we care about what happens to 
workers and that we give them some kind of help. It provides them with 
support, education, and training so that they can obtain new jobs in 
growth sectors. In my State, we used to do log exports. Logging was a 
big issue. Then it went away. Well, you have to retrain people, and 
community colleges have trained a lot of people in this kind of thing.

[[Page 15288]]

  In 2009 Congress made some much-needed reforms in TAA, many of which 
addressed past criticisms of the program. These reforms included 
extending TAA to cover service workers and more manufacturing workers, 
offering long-term training and increasing training funds, and 
increasing the health care coverage tax credit.
  This was probably the most important of the reforms. When people lose 
their job, they have no health care. And everything that you have in 
your life can be wiped out by an illness or an injury. So the idea that 
you can get COBRA is a nice idea, but you've got to have money to do 
that. Most of the unemployment checks in this country don't make it 
possible for people to take advantage of the COBRA. So when we had this 
increase in support from the Federal Government for workers, we were 
really looking at the real problems that people face.
  Now, unfortunately, last winter the House leadership let the 2009 
reforms lapse, leaving a lot of workers just hanging out there. The 
Generalized System of Preferences was also permitted to expire, which 
harmed businesses that rely on the program both in developing countries 
and in the United States. While it's long overdue, I'm pleased to see 
we're finally moving the legislation to expand both of these programs.
  I urge my colleagues to join me in supporting H.R. 2832, and I 
reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. CAMP. Madam Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the distinguished 
chairman of the Rules Committee, the gentleman from California (Mr. 
Dreier).
  Mr. DREIER. I thank my friend for yielding.
  Madam Speaker, it's taken a long time for us to get here. We've had 
hours and hours of debate, last night and today, and literally years 
and years and years of discussion and of negotiation, and a lot of 
anguish and a lot of pain, but we have finally gotten here.
  I want to begin by expressing my great appreciation to a man with 
whom I've been pleased to partner in cochairing what has been a 
longstanding group known as our Trade Working Group. It's sometimes 
partisan, sometimes bipartisan. It began two decades ago when Bill 
Archer was chairman of the Ways and Means Committee and Phil Crane 
chaired the Trade Subcommittee, and with every chairman of the Ways and 
Means Committee and the Trade Subcommittee, I've been privileged to 
join with them in working to build these coalitions for the very 
important goal of breaking down barriers to ensure that we can have 
access to consumer markets for union and nonunion workers in this 
country. And this is what it's all about.
  Dave Camp has done a phenomenal job in negotiating these trade 
agreements and the issue which is before us today, which is trade 
adjustment assistance. Now I know that there's a lot of concern about 
it. I'm frankly not a huge enthusiast, but I recognize that while there 
is a net gain--a net gain--when it comes to the issue of global trade, 
there are some workers who are displaced.

                              {time}  1650

  While some people have been saying that those of us who are 
enthusiastically supporting the Korea, Panama, and Colombia free trade 
agreements are greatly exaggerating the positive impact of this, I've 
got to say that I recognize that there are some people who are going to 
be going through challenging economic times as a byproduct of this 
agreement. That's why, as we look at this 21st century economy, it is 
critically important for us, Madam Speaker, to do everything that we 
can to ensure that our fellow Americans, U.S. workers, have the kind of 
training and expertise necessary to deal with this global economy in 
the 21st century. That's exactly what the Trade Adjustment Assistance 
package is all about. It's a modest package of $300 million.
  I know that last night, as he has just informed me, Mr. Camp outlined 
the details of this to the House. He worked with the chairman of the 
Senate Finance Committee, Mr. Baucus, and with others to get this to 
the point where we are.
  But we are now winding down this debate, and I think about the fact 
that, when Ronald Reagan on November 6 of 1979 announced his candidacy 
for President of the United States, in that speech, it was seen as 
heresy. I mean, it was almost a joke, Madam Speaker. Ronald Reagan said 
that he envisaged an accord of free trade among the Americas so that we 
could allow for the free flow of goods and services and capital. He was 
laughed at here in the United States, and he was laughed at throughout 
the hemisphere. Madam Speaker, since that time, we have seen 
tremendous, tremendous changes taking place.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The time of the gentleman has expired.
  Mr. CAMP. I yield the gentleman an additional 1 minute.
  Mr. DREIER. It has been almost 32 years since Ronald Reagan made that 
announcement; and last Monday, a week ago Monday, on October 3, 
Democratic President Barack Obama sent these agreements for us to 
consider, and here we are now doing this.
  There are so many people who have been involved in this. One of the 
things that has really impressed me, Madam Speaker, has been the 
involvement of the 87--now, I guess, 89--new Members on our side of the 
aisle who have brought about a change in the makeup of this 
institution. There are people who have stepped to the forefront--Tom 
Reed, Rick Berg, Tim Griffin, Bob Dold, Quico Canseco, and many 
others--who have felt strongly about the need to get our economy 
growing and who know that, in so doing, we will be able to create jobs 
for U.S. workers.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The time of the gentleman has again expired.
  Mr. CAMP. I yield the gentleman an additional 30 seconds.
  Mr. DREIER. Let me just close by saying, over that 5-year period of 
time, Madam Speaker, we have seen so many tremendous changes that have 
taken place. Five years is half the life for a child who was born on 
September 11. There have been changes in our economy--and in the global 
economy--in dealing with issues that weren't even addressed then. The 
iPad didn't exist 5 years ago when these were put into place. There are 
issues like encryption, cross-border dataflow, things like intermediary 
liability, privacy. Those were barely discussed then. Today, these are 
critical, important issues. This is a very small first step towards 
regaining our position as the world's global leader.
  I thank my friend for his support, and I thank all of our colleagues 
who have been involved in this.
  Mr. McDERMOTT. Madam Speaker, I yield 3\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman 
from Oregon (Mr. Blumenauer).
  Mr. BLUMENAUER. I rise in support of H.R. 2832, the Trade Adjustment 
Assistance Extension Act of 2011.
  This legislation continues vital coverage of the TAA program while it 
expands the Generalized System of Preferences, a key trade and 
development program.
  We have a responsibility to ensure that our workers, communities, and 
economy can adjust to a rapidly globalizing economy. As Congress 
advances international trade opportunities for our firms, it has an 
opportunity to ensure that American workers can also compete.
  Since 1962, the TAA has expanded to respond to the continual changes 
to the economy and the global system. Among the most significant 
changes were those that we made when the Democrats were in charge just 
in 2009, which expanded the program to include service workers as well 
as to improve the coverage of reemployment benefits, job search 
benefits, relocation and health care benefits. It produced tangible 
results. The coverage in 2008 certified 125,000 workers. As a result of 
the changes we made in 2009, 280,000 workers were certified.
  The expansion of the program appropriately reflects the challenges 
trade poses to our service economy, and continues our commitment to the 
manufacturing sector. In my State alone, in 2010, the coverage reached 
over 10,000 workers and directed $30 million in

[[Page 15289]]

Federal funds to carry out those efforts and to support our economy as 
it adjusted to competition from international trade.
  It's interesting to see the broad range of supporters. The 
Communications Workers of America say that TAA is a critical lifeline 
in providing retraining and education, helping service workers to pull 
themselves back up and find good new jobs. The U.S. Chamber of Commerce 
will score the vote on TAA, writing that this legislation is a 
thoughtful compromise that preserves the more effective elements of the 
five-decade-old TAA program.
  I am also pleased that we are dealing with the Generalized System of 
Preferences. I think my good friend from the State of Kansas may have 
been confused. I was, frankly, frustrated that it had been held up. We 
passed it in the last Congress. There was nothing to have prevented my 
Republican friends from bringing it forward at the beginning of this 
Congress. In fact, I wished that they would have, but they didn't get 
around to it until September. I don't know why, but I think the 
criticism is misplaced.
  Regardless, each day without action on GSP costs American companies 
$1.8 million in extra, unnecessary import tariffs. I've watched as the 
expiration of GSP has cost Evergreen Container in Portland, Oregon, 
$50,000 already this year--$10,000 for this company, $70,000 over here, 
another $5,000 here. It adds up. $1.8 million a day.
  But it's more than just a trade agreement and helping American 
companies. Under the GSP program, we will judge our trading partners on 
the protection of American commercial interests, such as the protection 
of intellectual property and preventing the seizure of property 
belonging to U.S. citizens or businesses. We judge them on the 
protection of individual rights, the protection of commonly accepted 
labor rights, and the elimination of child labor.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The time of the gentleman has expired.
  Mr. McDERMOTT. I yield the gentleman an additional 1 minute.
  Mr. BLUMENAUER. We ought to add the protection of the environment to 
this criteria. I raised it in our Ways and Means hearing. The thought 
was we were going to go ahead and not adjust the status quo, but the 
protection of the environment exerts tremendous influence on 
international trade. The trade in illegally logged timber, for 
instance, costs the U.S.-based legal timber industry billions of 
dollars a year. If we truly expect trade to be a tool of development, 
trade must support environmental protections in our partner nations as 
our free trade agreements do.
  Concern for the environment is a core element of development. It 
reflects the appreciation for civil law, for the protection of the 
rights of individuals, and of a concern for the long-term 
sustainability of state and society and of the planet. It should have a 
place in our GSP program. I hope when it comes next before us that 
we've added environmental protections to the criteria.
  Mr. CAMP. I yield 2 minutes to the distinguished gentleman from 
Pennsylvania (Mr. Kelly).
  Mr. KELLY. I rise in strong support of the bill.
  I can speak very clearly about the relationship that we have with 
Korea because, in addition to being a General Motors dealer who sells 
Chevrolets and Cadillacs, I also sell Hyundais and Kias. I can tell you 
of the alliance that we have had, of the very strong partner we have 
had in Korea for so many years. Since 1949, Korea has fought with us in 
every military skirmish--side by side, shoulder to shoulder with us. In 
the United States alone, Hyundai has invested over $3 billion in bricks 
and mortar in building two plants--one in Montgomery, Alabama, the 
other in West Point, Georgia. When we're worried about the number of 
cars being sold here, let's understand one thing, that over 60 percent 
of the Korean cars sold in the United States are made by Americans.

                              {time}  1700

  There are 60,000 jobs in the United States right now because of 
Hyundai and Kia's investment between our borders. And when we look at 
our market, our global opportunity, we have got to pass these trade 
agreements. We have got to pass the TAA. Why? Because it's good for 
America in addition to all these jobs and the possibility of 250,000 
additional jobs in the country that's looking for a job almost every 
day.
  These jobs are there. They're available to us. We have got to get on 
with these trade agreements. In addition, let me also state that 
Hyundai and Hyundai dealers have raised over $43 million in the fight 
against pediatric cancer, which is over 10 times what this Congress has 
invested in that fight against pediatric cancer.
  The opportunities are outstanding right now. The opportunity is now, 
and what better time to pass these agreements than when we're hunting 
for the jobs that we need the most for our people and also with allies 
who have stood shoulder-to-shoulder and arm-in-arm with us in every 
single battle.
  I would urge every single Member in this House to please pass the 
agreements. Let's move on. Let's get America back to work.
  Mr. McDERMOTT. Madam Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from 
Wisconsin (Mr. Kind).
  Mr. KIND. I thank my good friend and colleague from the committee for 
yielding me this time.
  Madam Speaker, many of us have been rising throughout the course of 
the debate today talking about the merits of the three pending trade 
agreements before us and why it's important for us to move forward on 
them, the reduction of tariff and non-tariff barriers, greater market 
access to the goods, product services that are being made right here in 
America, a system of rules that all countries have to abide by that are 
parties to this agreement, according to international labor and 
environmental standards included in the body of the agreement, fully 
enforceable with any other provision, protection of intellectual 
property rights, and on and on and on. That's why I'm supportive of the 
three bilateral agreements before us.
  But to be honest with the American people, and as long as trade 
remains a two-way street, there will be adverse impacts of trade on 
companies and workers here in America. When that occurs, then the 
workers of that business should not just be left on their own.
  That's why the reauthorization of the Trade Adjustment Assistance is 
important today, to move forward hand-in-hand with those trade 
agreements so those workers will have an opportunity to upgrade their 
skills, to go to school, to have a better match in the job market and 
find placement as quickly as possible. Since 1962, the TAA program has 
assisted those workers who lost their position as a result of 
international trade, helped them retrain and acquire skills needed for 
them to be more competitive in the global marketplace.
  In Wisconsin alone in 2010, we had an estimated 10,359 workers who 
were covered by this program, and my State's not alone. In fact, the 
three largest TAA State recipients were Michigan, Ohio, California.
  In 2010 in Wisconsin, 52 percent of the TAA participants were 
successfully employed within 3 months of leaving the program, and 88 
percent of those participants continued that employment over the next 
few quarters. The benefit of this program not only helps workers in my 
State, but also those specifically in western Wisconsin that I 
represent.
  In 2010, again, when Chart Energy & Chemicals in La Crosse moved some 
of its production line to China, approximately 230 employees were laid 
off, but they were able to receive reemployment and training services 
under the Federal TAA program. When Northern Engraving Corporation shut 
down its Luxco division tool shop in La Crosse, 27 workers were laid 
off; and they too qualified for assistance so that they could get 
reintegrated in the regional economy.
  There are many more examples of that throughout Wisconsin and, I am 
sure, throughout the country. And that's why it was a bit discouraging 
that it took so long for us to reach an

[[Page 15290]]

agreement on TAA reauthorization when there's wide bipartisan support 
and great support on the outside, from the Chamber of Commerce to the 
AFL-CIO, saying this is the right and decent thing to do for America's 
workers if we are going to move forward in a proactive trade agenda.
  I want to take a moment and commend my good friend and colleague, the 
chairman of the Ways and Means Committee, Mr. Camp, for the work that 
he did with Senator Baucus in order to get the TAA reauthorization in 
the place that it is today. I think it was very helpful.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mrs. Miller of Michigan). The time of the 
gentleman has expired.
  Mr. McDERMOTT. I yield the gentleman an additional 30 seconds.
  Mr. KIND. I thank my friend.
  As I mentioned in committee last week during the markup, I think it 
would make sense if the committee, Ways and Means that had 
jurisdiction, were to hold some hearings as we move forward on ways 
that we can improve the efficiency and the outcome of the TAA program. 
Any program is worthy of change and improvements. I think this is right 
for that.
  My concern is this is only a 3-year reauthorization. I hope we can 
continue bipartisan support that continues beyond 3 years so it's not 
having to be linked to other trade agreements, but I think our 
committee has some work to do to improve a very successful program.
  I encourage my colleagues to support it.
  Mr. CAMP. Madam Speaker, I would advise the gentleman from Washington 
that I have no other speakers and am prepared to close.
  I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. McDERMOTT. I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Washington 
(Mr. Smith).
  Mr. SMITH of Washington. Madam Speaker, I thank the Ways and Means 
Committee for their excellent work on the trade agreements and, most 
importantly, on Trade Adjustment Assistance; and I agree with the 
comments of my colleague from Wisconsin about why this program is so 
important.
  I mean the bottom line is the TAA and the trade agreements themselves 
are part of figuring out how to help American workers and the American 
economy compete in a very, very difficult global economic situation. 
The amount of skills that our workers need now are vastly beyond what 
they needed in previous generations, and the need to update them 
constantly in order to continue to be competitive, to continue to be 
employable are a significant challenge for American workers.
  This program is one way to give them help, to help give them the 
training and the skills that they need to continue to be employable. It 
is incredibly important for our workers, and we have heard the 
statistics about the number of workers in our country who have 
benefited from these programs.
  But I also submit to you that it is critically important to our 
economy. Our economy needs a skilled workforce in order to compete. 
Trade Adjustment Assistance is one way to help our workers get those 
skills that they need. Certainly it helps them, but it also helps our 
businesses and our overall economy.
  I, along with my colleague from Wisconsin, support all three trade 
agreements. I believe trade is critically important to growing our 
economy as well, and it's simple math. Ninety-five percent of the 
people in this world live someplace other than the United States of 
America, but the United States of America is responsible for 20 percent 
of the world's consumption.
  If we're going to grow, we need access to other markets. Korea, 
Colombia, and Panama are good steps in that direction to give us access 
to those other markets so that our businesses can have the possibility 
of growing their businesses and taking advantage of the growing 
economy.
  It has been Asia and other parts of the world that are growing the 
most. We need access to those markets. Trade agreements like this give 
us that opportunity.
  But as I have said for the entire 15 years I have been in Congress, 
that alone is not sufficient to protect American workers in our 
economy. Access to overseas markets on its own isn't enough to take 
care of our workers as they should be taken care of.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The time of the gentleman has expired.
  Mr. McDERMOTT. I yield the gentleman 1 additional minute.
  Mr. SMITH of Washington. They need training. That's the other 
critical piece of these trade agreements that I want to emphasize.
  For the first time--not the first time, actually we did it in Peru--
thanks, actually, to the leadership of the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. 
Levin) and Mr. Rangel and others, we have enforceable workers' rights 
in all three of these agreements.
  There have been justifiable criticisms, for instance, in Colombia of 
the ability of workers that organize and collectively bargain. But this 
agreement will give us the enforceable ability to make sure that they 
do. If Colombia or any one of these countries doesn't live up to the 
ILO standards and requirements, this agreement now gives us the ability 
to use trade sanctions to make sure that they do.
  That is an incredibly important step forward to protect the workers 
in this country. It needs to work together, access to overseas markets, 
to trade agreements and adequate protections for our workers so that 
they can compete in that environment with TSA, with the workers' rights 
provisions in these trade agreements. I believe that all three trade 
agreements and this TAA bill do this.
  I thank the Ways and Means Committee, both Republican and Democrat, 
for their work in making this happen.
  Mr. McDERMOTT. Madam Speaker, I yield 4 minutes to the gentleman from 
Michigan (Mr. Levin).

                              {time}  1710

  Mr. LEVIN. I rise in strong support of this proposal, this bill. It 
restarts TAA and the GSP program. You know, this should have happened 
long ago. The Republican decision to let it lapse over 8 months ago was 
very wrong. And as a result, and we're not sure of the exact numbers 
because that isn't public, but hundreds of service workers were 
completely shut out. Fewer manufacturing workers became eligible, and 
those who did qualify for TAA received less assistance and support. So 
now we're taking action today that's long overdue.
  I heard last night somebody said that the trade agreements were being 
held ``hostage'' to the TAA program. They just got it 180 degrees 
wrong. It was the TAA program that was being held hostage to trade 
agreements, and that never should have happened.
  Well, now we can act. I just want to say, some people, I think, look 
upon TAA as kind of the teaspoon of sugar to make the trade agreements 
go down. That could not be more incorrect. What TAA does is to help 
those who are thrown out of work because of trade, through no fault of 
their own. And if we're going to have a competitive workforce, people 
need to be able to be retrained. And interestingly enough, if you go to 
any place where TAA operates, you'll see a wide variety of people who 
have become eligible and who are being helped.
  So I very, very much support this bill which preserves the integrity, 
although not all, of the TAA program, and the 2009 reforms.
  I close by saying I also support the GSP provisions in this bill. I 
think there is a misconception. It does help, indeed, developing 
countries who rely on the GSP. But as our ranking member knows from all 
of his work, it also benefits American companies and the workers they 
employ. In fact, the majority of GSP imports are inputs used to support 
U.S. manufacturing, including raw materials, parts and components, and 
machinery and equipment. So not only did failing to extend GSP hurt 
developing countries, it hurt American businesses and their employees.
  A wide spectrum supports this bill, and I hope all of us on this side 
of the aisle will vote in favor of it.
  Mr. CAMP. I continue to reserve the balance of my time.

[[Page 15291]]

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from Washington has 5\1/2\ 
minutes remaining. The gentleman from Michigan has 13\1/2\ minutes 
remaining.
  Mr. McDERMOTT. I yield myself the balance of my time.
  Madam Speaker and Members of the House, I think it's important that 
we are passing this TAA today. But it is just the tip of the iceberg of 
the problems faced by workers in this country. I think that we are 
picking one group and saying, well, if you can qualify for having lost 
your job because of international trade adjustment of one sort or 
another, you're eligible for some benefits. But I think that in the 
much larger sense the House faces a problem. We're seeing it in the 
streets. We're seeing it on Wall Street. We're seeing it on my Central 
Plaza. We're seeing it here in Washington, DC. We're seeing it in 
Atlanta. The workers of this country are very upset, and there's a long 
agenda that is sort of dealt with here for one small group of workers 
that ought to be available for all workers.
  Now, we're going to have to extend unemployment benefits at the end 
of this year unless, like last year, at Christmastime, we'll be saying 
to people, You know what? We don't care about you; you're done. We 
haven't extended unemployment benefits. We ought to be doing it right 
now. It will be caught in the crush of all what happens at the end of 
the year, but it needs to happen.
  Foreclosure relief. We continue to have foreclosures in this country 
with no way out for the workers of this country, including these. We 
didn't do anything for foreclosure problems for somebody who's lost 
their job because of trade. We make no adjustment. We don't say that 
you can lower the amount of your loan or the banks must negotiate. We 
don't do anything for people who are struggling with foreclosures in 
this country.
  Health care. Health care in this bill makes it possible for people to 
get health care coverage. But there are thousands and thousands and 
thousands of workers, 14 million of them walking around in this 
country, with no health care, and we have done nothing this session to 
implement the Affordable Care Act.
  Finally, I would just say there is one last issue that needs to be 
thought about. What happens to a worker who, training or not, exhausts 
all their unemployment benefits, and they have a family and they have a 
house? Now in the 1930s what people did was backed the car up to the 
house, put the furniture up on top, and drove off and got a job in 
California. You have got millions of people today who are tied to a 
house in Flint, Michigan, or Toledo, Ohio, or a thousand places. They 
can't drive off to Florida and get a job, or to California. They're 
stuck. And so they find themselves with no access to any kind of way to 
pay their mortgage. They're going to get foreclosed. Then they can 
leave, of course.
  Or we've got to find some way to make it possible for workers in this 
economy as it recovers to somehow get by. If we don't care, if we just 
care about the workers who are lost because of trade--that's nice and 
we ought to do that. We're doing the right thing, but we ought to be 
thinking much broader than that if we're serious about coming out of 
the problems we have in this economy.
  I urge everyone to vote for this bill and begin the drumbeat for the 
unemployment insurance extension and a couple of other things.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. CAMP. Madam Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time.
  I support H.R. 2832, the bill that renews the Generalized System of 
Preferences, known as GSP, and also contains the Trade Adjustment 
Assistance, also called TAA.
  This bill really is the cornerstone of the carefully crafted 
bipartisan and bicameral agreement that then prompted the President to 
send the three trade agreements to the Congress last Monday. So this 
has allowed us, this legislation today, has allowed us to move forward 
on a long-stalled trade agenda.
  The bill renews GSP, which the House passed last month, and that is 
the largest trade preference program and is estimated to account for 
82,000 U.S. jobs that are directly or indirectly related to that 
program.
  The second portion of this bill, the bill that reauthorizes Trade 
Adjustment Assistance, is absolutely critical because it is one of the 
core items that has allowed these trade agreements to come forward. And 
this legislation really does ensure smaller government and less 
spending on an important program in these difficult economic times 
where we have a growing debt and deficit.
  This program was streamlined and scaled back, and just quickly I'll 
note some of the highlights. There is no TAA for public sector workers. 
The number of weeks was reduced from 156 in the 2009 law down to 117 
weeks. Also, there is no double-dipping. These benefits run 
concurrently with current unemployment insurance, or UI benefits, and 
the health care subsidy was reduced in this legislation.
  We also eliminated half of the allowable justifications for the 
program's training waivers to ensure that those who are eligible for 
TAA are in those training programs with only limited exceptions.
  We also consolidated and reduced all the non-income support 
expenditures. We reduced funding for the TAA for firms, and also added 
enhanced performance measures. Now, no worker will qualify for this 
unless certified by the Department of Labor. This is an important 
attempt to bring some reform and integrity to our unemployment 
programs, particularly by strengthening the job training provision 
where 80 percent of the waivers were used to waive people out of the 
requirement they job train.

                              {time}  1720

  This is an important reform; and it's going to be an important reform 
in this bill to make sure we implement it so as we move forward on the 
employment insurance debate later this year, as the gentleman from 
Washington State alluded to, we actually have a track record on some of 
these items and can see how they're at least beginning to work.
  So I urge my colleagues to support not only all three trade 
agreements, but also what really was the cornerstone for bringing those 
three trade agreements to the floor, H.R. 2832.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. GENE GREEN of Texas. Madam Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 
2832, legislation that will extend the Trade Adjustment Assistance 
program and the 2009 TAA reforms for workers, firms, and farmers 
through December 31, 2013.
  Since its creation nearly half a century ago, TAA has helped millions 
of Americans whose jobs were lost to outsourcing, off-shoring, and 
increased foreign competition.
  For many, TAA is a critical lifeline that provides retraining and 
education, health insurance assistance, and other crucial support 
initiatives to workers affected by international trade.
  TAA also helps small businesses and farmers become more competitive 
through the TAA for firms and TAA for farmers program.
  This legislation will also extend important reforms made to TAA in 
2009, but were allowed to expire in February of this year. These 
improvements include guaranteeing access to training for American 
service and manufacturing workers, as well as allow workers to qualify 
for TAA benefits if their firms shifted production to any country, 
including China and India, not just countries with which the United 
States has entered into a free trade agreement.
  More than 185,000 additional trade-impacted workers have become 
eligible for training opportunities and benefits under the 2009 
reforms.
  In my state alone, over 20,000 workers have benefited from TAA's 
services and support since May 2009. Nationwide, nearly half a million 
Americans have benefited from TAA over the past two years.
  TAA has historically received bipartisan support in this chamber. I 
hope my colleagues on both sides of the aisle will join me and support 
this legislation.
  Unfortunately, programs like TAA would not be necessary if this 
Congress and this Administration would push for trade deals that would 
focus on job creation here at home.
  The history of free trade agreements shows that the promised benefits 
of FTAs, be with Mexico and NAFTA, or with China and Most-Favored-Trade 
Status, have not materialized.

[[Page 15292]]

  In fact, it has been the opposite.
  Soon after the enactment of NAFTA in 1994, six factories in my 
district in Houston were shut down. The thousands of Houstonians who 
were laid-off were able to get assistance through TAA, but would have 
much rather have kept their jobs than seen their livelihoods moved to 
Mexico.
  Before NAFTA came into effect, the United States had an annual trade 
surplus of over $1 billion with Mexico. Last year, our nation's trade 
deficit with our southern neighbor reached $66 billion.
  The story is similar with China. In 1999, the year before permanent 
MFT status was granted on China, our trade deficit was $68 billion.
  Today, that deficit has exploded to $273 billion, and with it, 
millions of American jobs. A recent study by the Economic Policy 
Institute found that the trade deficit with China eliminated or 
displaced 2.8 million jobs between 2001 and 2010.
  I fear that enactment of the trade agreements debated in this chamber 
today will further exacerbate job losses in our country.
  EPI found in a study last year that the Korea FTA alone would 
displace 159,000 jobs in the United States. The same study found that 
the Colombia FTA would cost the American people 55,000 jobs.
  It is time for this chamber to ask why our nation gives open access 
to our markets to foreign competitors--as is the case with South Korea, 
Colombia, and Panama--and only, years later, look to gain similar 
access into their markets.
  History has shown me that genuine free trade comes when all parties 
receive equal access to each others' markets. All three of these 
agreements fail to do so.
  I close by calling on my colleagues today to vote in favor of working 
Americans by voting against these trade agreements and voting in favor 
of TAA.
  Mr. DINGELL. Madam Speaker, I rise in strong support of H.R. 2832, a 
bill whose consideration by the members of this House is long overdue. 
It is absolutely unconscionable that working Americans displaced by 
trade have had no Trade Adjustment Assistance (TAA) benefits since the 
beginning of this year. I am ashamed that partisan rhetoric has stalled 
congressional consideration of TAA, once a reliably non-partisan issue. 
In more human terms, my home state of Michigan has weathered the ill 
effects of free trade agreements arguably longer than any other state 
in the union. Thousands of displaced workers in my district have relied 
on TAA to start their careers over in fields like nursing, alternative 
energy, an information technology. These workers have experienced 
first-hand the benefits of TAA and understand--as I do--the value the 
program brings to communities across the country.
  In closing, I call on my colleagues to vote in support of H.R. 2832 
and stand up for the American families all over the country to whom 
free trade has been less than fair. And when we finish voting on this 
measure, I urge everyone on both sides of Capitol Hill--Republicans and 
Democrats alike--to take the country's best interests to heart and pass 
legislation to create jobs.
  Mr. WEST. Madam Speaker, I rise today in strong support of the Free 
Trade Agreements with Panama, Korea and Columbia. These long overdue 
trade agreements will increase exports, lower the trade deficit and 
stimulate much-needed economic growth in the United States.
  Free market competition is the proven way to create wealth and jobs 
in the economy. When the Federal Government attempts to create winners 
and losers, the American people get the short end of the stick.
  South Florida is the gateway to Latin America, and the trade 
agreements with Colombia and Panama will support and create jobs in 
Florida and throughout the nation by leveling the playing field for 
United States goods and services.
  Today, nearly all imports from Colombia and Panama enter the United 
States market duty free, but these countries continue to impose tariffs 
on our farm and manufactured goods exports that often soar into the 
double digits. Colombia currently collects $100 in tariffs on United 
States exports for every $1 the United States collects in tariffs on 
Colombian goods, and a similar lopsidedness holds back American export 
sales to Panama.
  The free trade agreements will eliminate these tariffs and other 
barriers United States exporters face, and will create new 
opportunities for the sale of American products. In addition, they will 
secure the intellectual property of United States inventors, 
researchers, and creators; open services markets; and protect American 
investors and the jobs they support in the United States.
  The independent United States International Trade Commission 
estimates that implementation of the three pending trade agreements 
would increase American exports by at least $13 billion and add at 
least $10 billion to our nation's Gross Domestic Product per year, 
which would mean 250,000 new jobs in the United States. Passing all 
three pending trade agreements will directly benefit small and medium-
sized businesses, as well as the hundreds of thousands of American jobs 
they create.
  Exports are critical to United States economic growth, and will have 
a significant, positive impact to my Congressional District that is 
home to two major ports--Port Everglades and the Port of Palm Beach. In 
1986, exports equaled 7.2 percent of GDP. In 2010, exports equaled 
nearly 13 percent of GDP.
  In 2010 alone, the State of Florida exported more than $4.2 billion 
to Colombia, Panama and South Korea combined. This represents a 
significant increase over the last decade. With the passage of the Free 
Trade Agreements, all indications point to significantly increased 
exports for the State of Florida.
  Finally, the implementation of each of these Free Trade Agreements is 
important for our security and geostrategic goals. Each of the 
agreements will strengthen the United States' relationship with South 
Korea, Colombia and Panama, some of our country's strongest partners in 
advancing both regional and global security.
  However, in May of 2011, President Barack Obama's Administration 
announced that it would not submit these three long-pending, job-
creating trade agreements to the United States Congress unless ``trade 
adjustment assistance'' benefits (TAA) were renewed and expanded.
  Quite simply, TAA is a federal program that sends cash and provides 
other benefits to workers whose jobs are purportedly affected 
negatively by trade. As a letter that was sent to Republican Leadership 
earlier this year states, ``TAA is undoubtedly--and deliberately 
designed as--a federal wealth redistribution program that has no 
business existing in a free society.''
  Furthermore, the central components of these TAA programs--job-
training, unemployment subsidies, and health-care subsidies--are 
available under dozens of other federal programs. In all, there are 
currently 47 government-sponsored and taxpayer-funded job training 
programs that received over $18 billion in Fiscal Year 2009. There are 
eight taxpayer-funded programs that provide unemployment insurance, and 
six taxpayer-funded programs that provide health insurance--all 
duplicative to programs found within TAA.
  TAA accepts the premise that free trade is bad and needs to be offset 
by another federal program paid for by the American taxpayers. By 
strictly assisting workers who claim job losses due to trade, the 
program provides an incentive to exaggerate the negative impact on jobs 
due to free trade. In my assessment, TAA programs amount to subsidized 
excuses. Americans can openly compete with anyone in the free market--
we do not need government creating victims.
  I will not support H.R. 2832 because TAA programs allow the Federal 
Government to pick winners and losers. As The Heritage Foundation 
recently analogized, ``the worker who loses his job to a foreign 
competitor should receive the same treatment as the Blockbuster 
employee who lost his job to Netflix.''
  Free trader benefits all parties involved--from consumers to business 
owners and farmers, to the port employees in my Congressional District. 
Free market competition and enterprise through free trade agreements 
should not be held back by what amounts to another duplicated, wasteful 
Federal Government program.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. All time for debate has expired.
  Pursuant to House Resolution 425, the previous question is ordered.
  The question is on the motion that the House concur in the Senate 
amendment.
  The question was taken; and the Speaker pro tempore announced that 
the ayes appeared to have it.
  Mr. McDERMOTT. Madam Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.
  The yeas and nays were ordered.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to clause 8 of rule XX and the 
order of the House today, further proceedings on this question will be 
postponed.

                          ____________________