[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 161 (2015), Part 3]
[Senate]
[Pages 3734-3736]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




                       TRADE PROMOTION AUTHORITY

  Mr. THUNE. Mr. President, if there is one thing Americans have made 
clear, it is that they want their leaders to do something about the 
economy. The recession may have officially ended almost 6 years ago, 
but millions of Americans are still struggling economically and 
opportunities are still few and far between.
  One big thing we can do to help the economy and expand opportunities 
for American workers is pass trade promotion authority or what we refer 
to as TPA. Our prior trade agreements have been a boon to the economy, 
providing American workers with jobs and American farmers, ranchers, 
and manufacturers with new markets for their goods. In my home State of 
South Dakota, 74 percent of exports go to countries with which the 
United States has a free-trade agreement. Between 2005 and 2014, South 
Dakota saw a 110-percent increase in exports to free-trade agreement 
countries. That has been a huge benefit to South Dakota farmers, 
ranchers, and manufacturers.
  Speaking of farmers and trade, today is National Agriculture Day. I 
would just like to add as an aside that the substantial agriculture 
trade surplus the United States currently enjoys is a tribute to the 
efficiency and the productivity of America's farmers and ranchers. I 
salute American farmers, ranchers, and agribusinesses that provide 
America and the world with a safe and abundant food supply.
  Passing trade promotion authority is one way we can ensure an even 
greater global expansion of U.S. agricultural trade. Currently, the 
administration is in the process of negotiating two new trade 
agreements that would open vast new markets for American products and 
put American goods on a level playing field internationally. The first 
of these agreements, the Trans-Pacific Partnership, is being negotiated 
with a number of Asia-Pacific nations, including Australia, Japan, New 
Zealand, Singapore, and Vietnam. Currently, American goods face heavy 
tariffs in many of these countries--at times as high as 85 percent. 
Tariffs of that size put American goods at incredible disadvantage 
compared to their foreign competitors. Tariffs provide a powerful 
disincentive for citizens in other nations to purchase American 
products. Removing this disincentive would increase foreign demand for 
U.S. products, which would mean more business for U.S. farmers, 
ranchers, and manufacturers and more jobs and opportunities for 
American workers.
  Just to give an example of how important trade is to American 
agriculture, we currently export half of U.S. wheat, milled rice 
production, and soybean production; 70 percent of almond, walnut, and 
pistachio production; more than 75 percent of cotton production; 40 
percent of grapes; 20 percent of cherries; 20 percent of apples; 20 
percent of poultry and pork production; and 10 percent of beef 
production.
  If you think about it, there are approximately now 260 preferential 
trade agreements worldwide. Only 20 of those involve the United States. 
Every time we have entered into a new trade agreement where we have 
been able to eliminate tariffs and duties on a lot of our products, we 
see an explosion in exports into those particular markets. That is why 
negotiating the strongest possible transpacific trade agreement, as 
well as the agreement the United States is negotiating with the 
European Union, has to be a priority. For that, we have to have trade 
promotion authority.
  Trade promotion authority has been the means by which nearly every 
U.S. free-trade agreement has been negotiated. The idea behind TPA is 
very simple: Congress sets the negotiating priorities the 
administration must follow and then requires the administration to 
consult with Congress during the negotiating process. In return, 
Congress promises a simple up-or-down vote on the final agreement, 
instead of a lengthy amendment process that could leave the final 
agreement looking nothing like the deal the administration negotiated.
  The promise of that up-or-down vote on a final agreement is the key. 
That is what gives our trading partners the confidence they need to put 
their best offers on the table, which allows for a successful 
conclusion of negotiations. Trade promotion authority demonstrates that 
Congress and the administration are on the same page when it comes to 
the content of trade agreements and that the final agreement will be 
either accepted or rejected, not amended beyond recognition.
  Trade promotion authority expired in 2007. Republicans have been 
pushing for renewing it ever since. The President is also on board. He 
called for trade promotion authority in this year's State of the Union 
Address.
  This is an excellent chance, I would add, for Democrats and 
Republicans to accomplish something significant for the American people 
and to show that Washington is working again.
  Unfortunately, while the President and Republicans are united on this 
issue, many Senate Democrats continue to oppose trade promotion 
authority legislation. The chairman of the Senate Finance Committee is 
currently engaged in negotiations on a TPA bill with the committee's 
ranking member, the senior Senator from Oregon. I am hopeful and I know 
a lot of us on the committee and many of us in this Chamber are hopeful 
that these efforts will yield legislation both Republicans and 
Democrats can support.
  Republicans are very open to suggestions and improvements. In fact, I 
expect the final agreement will include many elements advocated by the 
senior Senator from Oregon and other Senate Democrats, such as greater 
transparency surrounding trade negotiations. However, the one thing 
Republicans cannot support is an attempt to undermine the core of trade 
promotion authority--that guaranteed up-or-down vote that gives other 
countries the confidence to put forward their best offers in trade 
negotiations. Simply put, we cannot afford to weaken TPA.
  I know the senior Senator from Utah, who is the chairman of the 
Senate Finance Committee--who is on the floor right now; and we will 
hear from him in just a few minutes--is working very hard to ensure 
that we have a strong TPA agreement that we can bring to the floor of 
the Senate, that we can pass through the Congress, and that we can put 
on the President's desk so that we can enable these trade negotiations 
to continue in a way that will lead to a conclusion, to a result that 
is good for American manufacturers and service industries and American 
farmers and ranchers.
  If we fail to pass TPA, which will likely spell the failure of the 
Trans-Pacific Partnership and the United States-European Union trade 
agreement, we will not be maintaining the status quo. Just because we 
are not negotiating agreements does not mean other countries will not 
be. Other countries will secure favorable treatment of their goods, and 
American goods will fall further and further behind. That is not 
something we can afford in this economy.
  If we pass TPA, on the other hand, that will allow the transpacific 
trade agreement and the United States-European Union trade agreement to 
move forward, which means American producers will benefit from new 
markets for their goods and American workers will benefit from new jobs 
and opportunities. Since 2009, exports have accounted for more than 1 
million new jobs here in the United States. If we pass the Trans-
Pacific Partnership and the United States-European Union trade 
agreements, we could be looking at more than 1 million more new jobs 
over the next few years.
  It is time to pass TPA, to get these agreements concluded, and to let 
American workers and businesses start experiencing the benefits. It has 
been far too long. Mr. President, 2007 is when the last TPA expired. We 
are losing ground by the day when we are not in the room and a part of 
negotiating new trade agreements that are beneficial to American 
businesses, farmers, and ranchers.
  I wish to point out one more time that there are approximately now 
260 preferential trade agreements worldwide, only 20 of which involve 
the United States. So if we want to participate in a growing global 
economy

[[Page 3735]]

where 95 percent of the world's population lives, we have to become 
aggressive in creating the trading opportunities that will enable our 
businesses to prosper, to create good-paying jobs here in the United 
States, to raise incomes for middle-income families in this country, 
and to give us as a country an opportunity to lead the world when it 
comes to an economy that benefits all people--not just those here in 
the United States but all around the world. We have the wherewithal, 
the know-how, the technology, the creativity, and the innovation in our 
economy to make that possible, to make it happen. That is why these 
trade agreements are so essential.
  These trade agreements, as I pointed out, do not happen unless we 
have trade promotion authority in place to make sure they happen. If we 
do not have it in place and these trade agreements do not get done, it 
is not that America--that we are just going to be standing still, we 
are going to be losing ground as countries around the world that are 
aggressively trying to negotiate trade agreements and improve the 
economies of their countries continue to do that, leaving us further 
and further behind.
  So I hope we can get this passed through the Senate Finance 
Committee, passed through the Senate, the House of Representatives, and 
on the President's desk where it can be signed into law. The sooner 
that happens, the better it will be for our economy, for jobs, for 
American businesses, and for American farmers and ranchers.
  I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Utah.
  Mr. HATCH. Mr. President, I am pleased to join my colleagues, and I 
appreciated the wonderful remarks of the senior Senator from South 
Dakota, Mr. Thune. He is working very hard on that committee and really 
making a difference, as I think most people on the committee are trying 
to do. But he makes a difference, and I truly appreciated his remarks 
today.
  I am pleased to join my colleagues on the floor to talk about the 
importance of Trade Promotion Authority, or TPA, to the health of our 
Nation's economy. At the beginning of this Congress, I, along with many 
of my colleagues, stated publicly that trade was one of the few areas 
where the new Republican Congress would be able to find common ground 
with President Obama. I still believe that is the case.
  I chatted with him just last week--one of the few conversations I 
have had with him since he has been President--and I was very 
appreciative. He would like to get this done, and he is right.
  The Obama administration is currently negotiating some of the most 
ambitious trade agreements in our Nation's history. The first is the 
Trans-Pacific Partnership, or TPP, an Asia-Pacific trade agreement 
being negotiated between the United States and 11 other countries. On 
the other side of the world, the United States is negotiating a 
bilateral trade agreement with 28 countries of the European Union; that 
is called T-TIP.
  Together, these two trade agreements have the potential to greatly 
expand access to U.S. trade with other countries, allowing our job 
creators to sell more American-made goods and services. They are in 
demand. We just have to get in the game. This helps us create and 
support more high-paying export-related jobs at home. Of these two 
agreements, the TPP negotiations, or the Trans-Pacific Partnership 
negotiations, are further advanced. According to administration 
officials, the agreement could be concluded over the next few months. 
That is good news.
  Now, I wish talk about the bad news. Without renewal of effective TPA 
procedures, the administration will simply not be able to conclude a 
strong TPP agreement.
  Why is TPA, or trade promotion authority, so important?
  TPA is a compact between the Senate, the House, and the 
administration. Under this compact, the administration agrees to pursue 
specified objectives and consult with Congress as it negotiates trade 
agreements. Both the House and the Senate agree to allow for expedited 
consideration of trade agreements without amendments. This is essential 
for the conclusion and passage of strong trade agreements.
  Put simply, without TPA, our trading partners will not put their best 
offers on the table because they will have no guarantees the agreement 
they sign will be the same one Congress will vote on in the end. The 
distinguished Senator from South Dakota made that very clear. They 
don't want to agree with our Trade Representative and then have 
countless amendments in the House and the Senate that could change the 
whole agreement they had agreed to. That is why trade promotion 
authority became such an important part of our international relations.
  As former Deputy USTR Miriam Sapiro said in a recent speech:

       Neither our Asian nor our European partners want to get 
     into the real give-and-take that's necessary to reach a final 
     agreement until they are sure that the president has the 
     authority that he needs to conclude the deal. Absent that, 
     they are content to wait.

  In other words, if we want good trade agreements, we must have strong 
TPA procedures in place, and we need to be clear on one other point: 
The specifics of those procedures matter. They matter a great deal. 
This is bipartisanship at its best.
  Our goal should not be to pass just any TPA bill. Our goal should be 
to pass the strongest bill possible. That is the only way to ensure we 
get the best possible deal out of our trade negotiations, which is, in 
the end, the purpose of TPA. We have used the same basic TPA structure 
for every major trade agreement over the last four decades and, quite 
frankly, the results speak for themselves.
  As my colleagues have so eloquently stated today, we do not need new, 
untested changes to establish TPA procedures that can hamper the 
process and make it harder for both our negotiators to reach a good 
deal and for Congress to be able to vote on agreement up or down.
  When Republicans took control of the Senate this year and I became 
the chairman of the Senate Finance Committee, I made renewing TPA my 
top trade priority for this Congress. I set out to work with my 
colleagues on both sides of the aisle to craft the best possible bill. 
We already had a good framework in place--the bill I introduced last 
year with former Chairman Baucus and Chairman Camp, which had broad 
support in Congress, in the administration, and in the business 
community.
  My goal has been to see if we could improve upon that product in 
order to broaden support for TPA. I am certainly willing to do that, 
but I have made it clear throughout this process that I cannot agree to 
any bill that would dilute the effectiveness of TPA as a tool to 
negotiate and enact strong trade agreements.
  Recently, I had the opportunity to talk personally with President 
Obama about TPA, as I mentioned. I think he understands the importance 
of getting a strong TPA bill through Congress. That is why I am willing 
to work with him to make the advancement of our Nation's trade agenda a 
higher priority. I am hoping the President will do his part to help 
persuade the Members of his party to support an effective TPA bill. He 
says he will, and I believe him.
  Make no mistake. Our competitors are not sitting on their laurels 
when it comes to trade. There are literally hundreds of trade 
agreements under negotiation throughout the world, and the United 
States is party to only a few.
  This hurts our exporters badly. This bill is really necessary. We 
need to do better. We need to do everything we can to ensure that the 
United States is not only a participant in international trade but a 
leader. The only way we can do that is by passing a strong TPA bill.
  I stand ready and willing to work with the White House and my 
colleagues in the Senate to get an effective TPA bill introduced out of 
committee and onto the Senate floor as soon as possible.
  We cannot afford to miss this opportunity. This is a grand 
opportunity for us. It is bipartisan down the line, and I think it 
would be a great accomplishment for the Congress of the United

[[Page 3736]]

States to get this done. But, more importantly, it would be a great 
accomplishment for the President and this administration to have this 
done. It would give him the tools to do a lot of the things that need 
to be done.
  I suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
  The senior assistant legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Mr. COATS. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for 
the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.

                          ____________________