[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 161 (2015), Part 5]
[Senate]
[Pages 6495-6496]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




                           TRADE LEGISLATION

  Mr. McCONNELL. Mr. President, it was really quite something to watch 
President Obama's party vote to filibuster his top domestic legislative 
priority yesterday. That is what we saw right here in the Senate. It 
left pretty much everyone scratching their heads.
  The Democratic leader made clear yesterday that he was not interested 
in debating the ``merits of the bill.'' In other words, he told us that 
this filibuster is for political reasons only.
  It makes sense, considering that this filibuster is all about 
appeasing a facts-optional crowd on the left that hasn't been able to 
marshal much of a serious, fact-based argument to support its 
opposition to more American exports and more American trade jobs.
  You don't have to take my word for it. It is President Obama who said 
the far left's arguments don't ``stand the test of fact and scrutiny.'' 
It is President Obama who says the far left is just ``making stuff 
up.'' And it is President Obama who warns the far left about ``ignoring 
realities.''
  In other words, hardly anyone believes there is a serious policy leg 
for these folks to stand on--not that there is a viable process excuse 
for this filibuster, either.
  A senior Senator in the Democrat leadership essentially rebutted the 
latest process argument yesterday. He said: ``[N]o one disputed in 
committee that we'd get a vote separately''--separately--``on the 
customs bill'' because it contained a provision, he said, that would 
bring down TPA.
  What we can infer from this is that the demand to merge four separate 
trade bills--including the Customs bill--into one trade bill isn't a 
strategy designed to pass better trade legislation but a poison pill 
designed to kill it. So we certainly won't be doing that, because our 
goal here should be to score a serious policy win for the American 
people and not claim a symbolic scalp for the extreme left.
  That is why Republicans have chosen to work closely with President 
Obama to advance a serious trade and economic growth agenda. It is not 
a natural position for us, I assure you, or for the President to be in 
politically, but we agree that strengthening the middle class by 
knocking down unfair trade restrictions is a good idea. Since we agree 
on the policy, I think we have a duty to the American people to 
cooperate responsibly to pursue it. And that is just what we have done. 
Not a single Republican--not one--voted yesterday against at least 
opening the debate on this 21st century American trade agenda.
  Now, all that is needed to move forward is for our Democratic friends 
who tell the public they support trade to withdraw support for a 
filibuster they know is wrong on the merits.
  Yes, I understand it may be uncomfortable for our Democratic 
colleagues to cross loud factions in their party, but Republicans 
proved yesterday that it is possible to put good policy over easy 
politics.
  So Democrats have to choose. Will they allow themselves to keep being 
led around by the most extreme elements of their party, even when it 
runs counter to the needs of their constituents, or will they take a 
stand and lead? The American people are counting on them to make the 
right choice.
  When they do, they will find the same willing partners who have 
always been here. They will find we are ready to continue working 
across the aisle in good faith to move forward.
  Recall that we have only gotten as far as we have already because of 
a significant bipartisan compromise on Chairman Hatch's part. He worked 
very closely with Senator Wyden to hammer out a trade package that 
garnered an astonishing 20 votes in the Finance Committee, with just 6 
Senators opposed--just 6. That huge level of bipartisan support really 
surprised everybody. We have seen some unfortunate partisan rear-guard 
action since then that is designed to sink these American trade jobs. 
But we can rise above it. That is why Republicans remain committed to 
carrying forward the kind of bipartisan momentum we saw over in the 
Finance Committee, just as we have been all along on other issues. We 
are happy to work with any Senator in a serious way. The door is open.
  I have made clear that there would be an open amendment process. I 
have made clear that Senators would receive fair consideration once we 
proceed to debating this bill. The bipartisan path forward I offered 
yesterday morning is still on the table. I remain committed to the 
significant concession my party already made about processing TPA and 
TAA. I don't like TAA. I think it is a program very hard to defend. But 
I understand that if we are going to get TPA, our friends on the other 
side need TAA. If Chairman Hatch and Senator Wyden can agree to other 
policies, we can consider those, too. What we won't be doing is 
pursuing poison-pill strategies such as the one I mentioned already.
  Let's also agree that no Senator is in a position to guarantee that 
some bill can clear both Houses of Congress, receive a signature from 
the President, secure the blessings of the Supreme Court, and whatever 
else our friends might demand. This wouldn't be much

[[Page 6496]]

of a democracy if Senators could actually make such an impossible 
guarantee.
  So look, we want to have a serious discussion. We want to actually 
get a good policy outcome. That has always been our goal. I hope more 
will now join us to allow debate on the trade discussion our 
constituents deserve.

                          ____________________