[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 161 (2015), Part 5]
[Senate]
[Page 6501]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




                                 TRADE

  Mr. BLUNT. Mr. President, on another topic, I would just like to say 
that I hope we can move forward with the ability to have trade 
agreements. I was disappointed yesterday that we were not able to move 
forward and not vote on a trade agreement but to vote on the framework 
that at some point in the future would allow us to negotiate a trade 
agreement.
  You cannot get the final negotiation on a trade agreement unless the 
people with whom you are negotiating know that the trade agreement is 
going to be voted on--yes or no--by the Congress. It cannot be an 
agreement that the Congress can go back and look at and say: Well, we 
do not really like that provision. We do not like this provision. Let's 
send it back, but let's not do what they said they were willing to do 
as part of this negotiation.
  Trade is good for us. Trade is in almost all cases about tearing down 
barriers to our products, because we have very few barriers to those 
that we trade with. So trade is almost always an opportunity to sell 
more American products in other countries, particularly as it relates 
to the most likely first agreement we would get if we would get trade 
promotion authority. That agreement, the Trans-Pacific Partnership, 
will make a huge difference in the way that part of the world develops, 
if they develop based on a trade relationship where the rule of law 
matters, a trade relationship where everyone is treated in a way where 
you are looking for a way to come back and have more ability to work 
together in the future, where you are working on trade relationships 
where not every ounce of profit has to be made on any one deal, because 
you are always thinking about what happens next.
  We have great opportunities there and they do too. That part of the 
world will be dramatically different 10 years from now and even more 
different 20 years from now, if our system becomes a system that 
becomes the basis for how they move into their economic future and 
create economic opportunity for them and for us--as opposed to the 
other alternatives, which are much more colonial in nature, much more 
cynical in nature, much more likely to be one big trading partner, and 
there is one little trading partner in every deal.
  That is not the way this works. That is not the way it should work, 
but we can't get to that final opportunity for American workers unless 
we have an agreement where we understand what happens to that agreement 
once it has been negotiated.
  The best thing, the best offer does not come until the people on the 
other side of the negotiating table know they are doing this under 
trade promotion authority, an authority that every President since 
Franklin Roosevelt has had, and every President since Franklin 
Roosevelt asked for, until this President, who didn't ask for it until 
his second term and then clearly didn't do anything to push for it 
until after the congressional elections last year.
  But this is a 6-year ability to create more opportunities for 
American workers and jobs that provide good take-home pay for American 
workers. I hope the unfortunate decision not to move forward and get 
this done is a decision the Senate quickly has a chance to rethink, 
revote on, and move forward.
  With that, I yield the floor.

                          ____________________