[House Report 105-341]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]



105th Congress                                            Rept. 105-341
                        HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

 1st Session                                                     Part 1
_______________________________________________________________________


 
           RECIPROCAL TRADE AGREEMENT AUTHORITIES ACT OF 1997

                                _______
                                

                October 23, 1997.--Ordered to be printed

_______________________________________________________________________


    Mr. Archer, from the Committee on Ways and Means, submitted the 
                               following

                              R E P O R T

                             together with

                            DISSENTING VIEWS

                        [To accompany H.R. 2621]

      [Including cost estimate of the Congressional Budget Office]

  The Committee on Ways and Means, to whom was referred the 
bill (H.R. 2621) to extend trade authorities procedures with 
respect to reciprocal trade agreements, and for other purposes, 
having considered the same, report favorably thereon with an 
amendment and recommend that the bill as amended do pass.

                                CONTENTS

                                                                   Page
  I. Introduction....................................................12
          A. Purpose and Summary.................................    12
          B. Background and Need for Legislation.................    13
          C. Legislative History.................................    14
 II. Explanation of the Bill.........................................14
          A. Title I, Trade Authorities Procedures...............    14
          B. Title II, Trade Adjustment Assistance...............    29
          C. Title III, Revenue Provisions.......................    31
III. Vote of the Committee...........................................31
 IV. Budget Effects of the Bill......................................32
          A. Committee Estimates of Budgetary Effects............    32
          B. Budget Authority and Tax Expenditures...............    32
          C. Cost Estimate Prepared by the Congressional Budget 
              Office.............................................    32
  V. Other Matters to be Discussed Under the Rules of the House......36
          A. Committee Oversight Findings and Recommendations....    36
          B. Summary of Findings and Recommendations of the 
              Committee on Government Reform and Oversight.......    36
          C. Constitutional Authority Statement..................    36
          D. Information Relating to Unfunded Mandates...........    36
 VI. Changes in Existing Law Made by the Bill, as Reported...........36
VII. Dissenting Views........................................44, 46, 48

    The amendment is as follows:
    Strike out all after the enacting clause and insert in lieu 
thereof the following:

                 TITLE I--TRADE AUTHORITIES PROCEDURES

SEC. 101. SHORT TITLE.

  This title may be cited as the ``Reciprocal Trade Agreement 
Authorities Act of 1997''.

SEC. 102. TRADE NEGOTIATING OBJECTIVES.

  (a) Overall Trade Negotiating Objectives.--The overall trade 
negotiating objectives of the United States for agreements subject to 
the provisions of section 103 are--
          (1) to obtain more open, equitable, and reciprocal market 
        access;
          (2) to obtain the reduction or elimination of barriers and 
        distortions that are directly related to trade and that 
        decrease market opportunities for United States exports or 
        otherwise distort United States trade;
          (3) to further strengthen the system of international trading 
        disciplines and procedures, including dispute settlement; and
          (4) to foster economic growth, raise living standards, and 
        promote full employment in the United States and to enhance the 
        global economy.
  (b) Principal Trade Negotiating Objectives.--
          (1) Trade barriers and distortions.--The principal 
        negotiating objectives of the United States regarding trade 
        barriers and other trade distortions are--
                  (A) to expand competitive market opportunities for 
                United States exports and to obtain fairer and more 
                open conditions of trade by reducing or eliminating 
                tariff and nontariff barriers and policies and 
                practices of foreign governments directly related to 
                trade that decrease market opportunities for United 
                States exports or otherwise distort United States 
                trade; and
                  (B) to obtain reciprocal tariff and nontariff barrier 
                elimination agreements, with particular attention to 
                those tariff categories covered in section 111(b) of 
                the Uruguay Round Agreements Act (19 U.S.C. 3521(b)).
          (2) Trade in services.--The principal negotiating objective 
        of the United States regarding trade in services is to reduce 
        or eliminate barriers to international trade in services, 
        including regulatory and other barriers that deny national 
        treatment or unreasonably restrict the establishment or 
        operations of service suppliers.
          (3) Foreign investment.--The principal negotiating objective 
        of the United States regarding foreign investment is to reduce 
        or eliminate artificial or trade-distorting barriers to trade 
        related foreign investment by--
                  (A) reducing or eliminating exceptions to the 
                principle of national treatment;
                  (B) freeing the transfer of funds relating to 
                investments;
                  (C) reducing or eliminating performance requirements 
                and other unreasonable barriers to the establishment 
                and operation of investments;
                  (D) seeking to establish standards for expropriation 
                and compensation for expropriation, consistent with 
                United States legal principles and practice; and
                  (E) providing meaningful procedures for resolving 
                investment disputes.
          (4) Intellectual property.--The principal negotiating 
        objectives of the United States regarding trade-related 
        intellectual property are--
                  (A) to further promote adequate and effective 
                protection of intellectual property rights, including 
                through--
                          (i)(I) ensuring accelerated and full 
                        implementation of the Agreement on Trade-
                        Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights 
                        referred to in section 101(d)(15) of the 
                        Uruguay Round Agreements Act (19 U.S.C. 
                        3511(d)(15)), particularly with respect to 
                        United States industries whose products are 
                        subject to the lengthiest transition periods 
                        for full compliance by developing countries 
                        with that Agreement, and
                          (II) ensuring that the provisions of any 
                        multilateral or bilateral trade agreement 
                        entered into by the United States provide 
                        protection at least as strong as the protection 
                        afforded by chapter 17 of the North American 
                        Free Trade Agreement and the annexes thereto;
                          (ii) providing strong protection for new and 
                        emerging technologies and new methods of 
                        transmitting and distributing products 
                        embodying intellectual property;
                          (iii) preventing or eliminating 
                        discrimination with respect to matters 
                        affecting the availability, acquisition, scope, 
                        maintenance, use, and enforcement of 
                        intellectual property rights; and
                          (iv) providing strong enforcement of 
                        intellectual property rights, including through 
                        accessible, expeditious, and effective civil, 
                        administrative, and criminal enforcement 
                        mechanisms; and
                  (B) to secure fair, equitable, and nondiscriminatory 
                market access opportunities for United States persons 
                that rely upon intellectual property protection.
          (5) Transparency.--The principal negotiating objective of the 
        United States with respect to transparency is to obtain broader 
        application of the principle of transparency through--
                  (A) increased and more timely public access to 
                information regarding trade issues and the activities 
                of international trade institutions; and
                  (B) increased openness of dispute settlement 
                proceedings, including under the World Trade 
                Organization.
          (6) Reciprocal trade in agriculture.--The principal 
        negotiating objective of the United States with respect to 
        agriculture is to obtain competitive opportunities for United 
        States exports in foreign markets substantially equivalent to 
        the competitive opportunities afforded foreign exports in 
        United States markets and to achieve fairer and more open 
        conditions of trade in bulk and value-added commodities by--
                  (A) reducing or eliminating, by a date certain, 
                tariffs or other charges that decrease market 
                opportunities for United States exports--
                          (i) giving priority to those products that 
                        are subject to significantly higher tariffs or 
                        subsidy regimes of major producing countries; 
                        and
                          (ii) providing reasonable adjustment periods 
                        for United States import-sensitive products, in 
                        close consultation with the Congress on such 
                        products before initiating tariff reduction 
                        negotiations;
                  (B) reducing or eliminating subsidies that decrease 
                market opportunities for United States exports or 
                unfairly distort agriculture markets to the detriment 
                of the United States;
                  (C) developing, strengthening, and clarifying rules 
                and effective dispute settlement mechanisms to 
                eliminate practices that unfairly decrease United 
                States market access opportunities or distort 
                agricultural markets to the detriment of the United 
                States, particularly with respect to import-sensitive 
                products, including--
                          (i) unfair or trade-distorting activities of 
                        state trading enterprises and other 
                        administrative mechanisms, with emphasis on 
                        requiring price transparency in the operation 
                        of state trading enterprises and such other 
                        mechanisms;
                          (ii) unjustified trade restrictions or 
                        commercial requirements affecting new 
                        technologies, including biotechnology;
                          (iii) unjustified sanitary or phytosanitary 
                        restrictions, including those not based on 
                        scientific principles in contravention of the 
                        Uruguay Round Agreements;
                          (iv) other unjustified technical barriers to 
                        trade; and
                          (v) restrictive rules in the administration 
                        of tariff rate quotas;
                  (D) improving import relief mechanisms to recognize 
                the unique characteristics of perishable agriculture;
                  (E) taking into account whether a party to the 
                negotiations has failed to adhere to the provisions of 
                already existing trade agreements with the United 
                States or has circumvented obligations under those 
                agreements;
                  (F) taking into account whether a product is subject 
                to market distortions by reason of a failure of a major 
                producing country to adhere to the provisions of 
                already existing trade agreements with the United 
                States or by the circumvention by that country of its 
                obligations under those agreements; and
                  (G) otherwise ensuring that countries that accede to 
                the World Trade Organization have made meaningful 
                market liberalization commitments in agriculture.
          (7) Labor, the environment, and other matters.--The principal 
        negotiating objective of the United States regarding labor, the 
        environment, and other matters is to address the following 
        aspects of foreign government policies and practices regarding 
        labor, the environment, and other matters that are directly 
        related to trade:
                  (A) To ensure that foreign labor, environmental, 
                health, or safety policies and practices do not 
                arbitrarily or unjustifiably discriminate or serve as 
                disguised barriers to trade.
                  (B) To ensure that foreign governments do not 
                derogate from or waive existing domestic environmental, 
                health, safety, or labor measures, including measures 
                that deter exploitative child labor, as an 
                encouragement to gain competitive advantage in 
                international trade or investment. Nothing in this 
                subparagraph is intended to address changes to a 
                country's laws that are consistent with sound 
                macroeconomic development.
          (8) WTO extended negotiations.--The principal negotiating 
        objectives of the United States regarding trade in financial 
        services are those set forth in section 135(a) of the Uruguay 
        Round Agreements Act (19 U.S.C. 3555(a)), regarding trade in 
        civil aircraft are those set forth in section 135(c) of that 
        Act, and regarding rules of origin are the conclusion of an 
        agreement described in section 132 of that Act (19 U.S.C. 
        3552).
  (c) International Economic Policy Objectives.--
          (1) In general.--The President should take into account the 
        relationship between trade agreements and other important 
        priorities of the United States and seek to ensure that the 
        trade agreements entered into by the United States complement 
        and reinforce other policy goals. The United States priorities 
        in this area include--
                  (A) seeking to ensure that trade and environmental 
                policies are mutually supportive;
                  (B) seeking to protect and preserve the environment 
                and enhance the international means for doing so, while 
                optimizing the use of the world's resources;
                  (C) promoting respect for worker rights and the 
                rights of children and an understanding of the 
                relationship between trade and worker rights, 
                particularly by working with the International Labor 
                Organization to encourage the observance and 
                enforcement of core labor standards, including the 
                prohibition on exploitative child labor; and
                  (D) supplementing and strengthening standards for 
                protection of intellectual property under conventions 
                administered by international organizations other than 
                the World Trade Organization, expanding these 
                conventions to cover new and emerging technologies, and 
                eliminating discrimination and unreasonable exceptions 
                or preconditions to such protection.
          (2) Applicability of trade authorities procedures.--Nothing 
        in this subsection shall be construed to authorize the use of 
        the trade authorities procedures described in section 103 to 
        modify United States law.
  (d) Guidance for Negotiators.--
          (1) Domestic objectives.--In pursuing the negotiating 
        objectives described in subsection (b), the negotiators on 
        behalf of the United States shall take into account United 
        States domestic objectives, including the protection of health 
        and safety, essential security, environmental, consumer, and 
        employment opportunity interests, and the law and regulations 
        related thereto.
          (2) Consultations with congressional advisers and enforcement 
        of the trade laws.--In the course of negotiations conducted 
        under this title, the United States Trade Representative 
        shall--
                  (A) consult closely and on a timely basis with, and 
                keep fully apprised of the negotiations, the 
                congressional advisers on trade policy and negotiations 
                appointed under section 161 of the Trade Act of 1974; 
                and
                  (B) preserve the ability of the United States to 
                enforce rigorously its trade laws, including the 
                antidumping and countervailing duty laws, and avoid 
                agreements which lessen the effectiveness of domestic 
                and international disciplines on unfair trade, 
                especially dumping and subsidies, in order to ensure 
                that United States workers, agricultural producers, and 
                firms can compete fully on fair terms and enjoy the 
                benefits of reciprocal trade concessions.
  (e) Adherence to Obligations Under Uruguay Round Agreements.--In 
determining whether to enter into negotiations with a particular 
country, the President shall take into account the extent to which that 
country has implemented, or has accelerated the implementation of, its 
obligations under the Uruguay Round Agreements.

SEC. 103. TRADE AGREEMENTS AUTHORITY.

  (a) Agreements Regarding Tariff Barriers.--
          (1) In general.--Whenever the President determines that one 
        or more existing duties or other import restrictions of any 
        foreign country or the United States are unduly burdening and 
        restricting the foreign trade of the United States and that the 
        purposes, policies, and objectives of this title will be 
        promoted thereby, the President--
                  (A) may enter into trade agreements with foreign 
                countries before--
                          (i) October 1, 2001, or
                          (ii) October 1, 2005, if trade authorities 
                        procedures are extended under subsection (c), 
                        and
                  (B) may, subject to paragraphs (2) and (3), 
                proclaim--
                          (i) such modification or continuance of any 
                        existing duty,
                          (ii) such continuance of existing duty-free 
                        or excise treatment, or
                          (iii) such additional duties,
                as the President determines to be required or 
                appropriate to carry out any such trade agreement. The 
                President shall notify the Congress of the President's 
                intention to enter into an agreement under this 
                subsection.
          (2) Limitations.--No proclamation may be made under paragraph 
        (1) that--
                  (A) reduces any rate of duty (other than a rate of 
                duty that does not exceed 5 percent ad valorem on the 
                date of the enactment of this Act) to a rate of duty 
                which is less than 50 percent of the rate of such duty 
                that applies on such date of enactment;
                  (B) reduces the rate of duty on an article to take 
                effect on a date that is more than 10 years after the 
                first reduction that is proclaimed to carry out a trade 
                agreement with respect to such article; or
                  (C) increases any rate of duty above the rate that 
                applied on January 1, 1996.
          (3) Aggregate reduction; exemption from staging.--
                  (A) Aggregate reduction.--Except as provided in 
                subparagraph (B), the aggregate reduction in the rate 
                of duty on any article which is in effect on any day 
                pursuant to a trade agreement entered into under 
                paragraph (1) shall not exceed the aggregate reduction 
                which would have been in effect on such day if--
                          (i) a reduction of 3 percent ad valorem or a 
                        reduction of one-tenth of the total reduction, 
                        whichever is greater, had taken effect on the 
                        effective date of the first reduction 
                        proclaimed under paragraph (1) to carry out 
                        such agreement with respect to such article; 
                        and
                          (ii) a reduction equal to the amount 
                        applicable under clause (i) had taken effect at 
                        1-year intervals after the effective date of 
                        such first reduction.
                  (B) Exemption from staging.--No staging is required 
                under subparagraph (A) with respect to a duty reduction 
                that is proclaimed under paragraph (1) for an article 
                of a kind that is not produced in the United States. 
                The United States International Trade Commission shall 
                advise the President of the identity of articles that 
                may be exempted from staging under this subparagraph.
          (4) Rounding.--If the President determines that such action 
        will simplify the computation of reductions under paragraph 
        (3), the President may round an annual reduction by an amount 
        equal to the lesser of--
                  (A) the difference between the reduction without 
                regard to this paragraph and the next lower whole 
                number; or
                  (B) one-half of 1 percent ad valorem.
          (5) Other limitations.--A rate of duty reduction that may not 
        be proclaimed by reason of paragraph (2) may take effect only 
        if a provision authorizing such reduction is included within an 
        implementing bill provided for under section 105 and that bill 
        is enacted into law.
          (6) Other tariff modifications.--Notwithstanding paragraphs 
        (1)(B) and (2) through (5), and subject to the consultation and 
        layover requirements of section 115 of the Uruguay Round 
        Agreements Act, the President may proclaim the modification of 
        any duty or staged rate reduction of any duty set forth in 
        Schedule XX, as defined in section 2(5) of that Act, if the 
        United States agrees to such modification or staged rate 
        reduction in a negotiation for the reciprocal elimination or 
        harmonization of duties under the auspices of the World Trade 
        Organization or as part of an interim agreement leading to the 
        formation of a regional free-trade area.
          (7) Authority under uruguay round agreements act not 
        affected.--Nothing in this subsection shall limit the authority 
        provided to the President under section 111(b) of the Uruguay 
        Round Agreements Act (19 U.S.C. 3521(b)).
  (b) Agreements Regarding Tariff and Nontariff Barriers.--
          (1) In general.--(A) Whenever the President determines that--
                  (i) one or more existing duties or any other import 
                restriction of any foreign country or the United States 
                or any other barrier to, or other distortion of, 
                international trade unduly burdens or restricts the 
                foreign trade of the United States or adversely affects 
                the United States economy, or
                  (ii) the imposition of any such barrier or distortion 
                is likely to result in such a burden, restriction, or 
                effect,
        and that the purposes, policies, and objectives of this title 
        will be promoted thereby, the President may enter into a trade 
        agreement described in subparagraph (B) during the period 
        described in subparagraph (C).
          (B) The President may enter into a trade agreement under 
        subparagraph (A) with foreign countries providing for--
                  (i) the reduction or elimination of a duty, 
                restriction, barrier, or other distortion described in 
                subparagraph (A), or
                  (ii) the prohibition of, or limitation on the 
                imposition of, such barrier or other distortion.
          (C) The President may enter into a trade agreement under this 
        paragraph before--
                  (i) October 1, 2001, or
                  (ii) October 1, 2005, if trade authorities procedures 
                are extended under subsection (c).
          (2) Conditions.--A trade agreement may be entered into under 
        this subsection only if such agreement makes progress in 
        meeting the applicable objectives described in section 102 and 
        the President satisfies the conditions set forth in section 
        104.
          (3) Bills qualifying for trade authorities procedures.--The 
        provisions of section 151 of the Trade Act of 1974 (in this 
        title referred to as ``trade authorities procedures'') apply to 
        a bill of either House of Congress consisting only of--
                  (A) a provision approving a trade agreement entered 
                into under this subsection and approving the statement 
                of administrative action, if any, proposed to implement 
                such trade agreement,
                  (B) provisions directly related to the principal 
                trade negotiating objectives set forth in section 
                102(b) achieved in such trade agreement, if those 
                provisions are necessary for the operation or 
                implementation of United States rights or obligations 
                under such trade agreement,
                  (C) provisions that define and clarify, or provisions 
                that are related to, the operation or effect of the 
                provisions of the trade agreement,
                  (D) provisions to provide adjustment assistance to 
                workers and firms adversely affected by trade, and
                  (E) provisions necessary for purposes of complying 
                with section 252 of the Balanced Budget and Emergency 
                Deficit Control Act of 1985 in implementing the trade 
                agreement,
        to the same extent as such section 151 applies to implementing 
        bills under that section. A bill to which this subparagraph 
        applies shall hereafter in this title be referred to as an 
        ``implementing bill''.
  (c) Extension Disapproval Process for Congressional Trade Authorities 
Procedures.--
          (1) In general.--Except as provided in section 105(b)--
                  (A) the trade authorities procedures apply to 
                implementing bills submitted with respect to trade 
                agreements entered into under subsection (b) before 
                October 1, 2001; and
                  (B) the trade authorities procedures shall be 
                extended to implementing bills submitted with respect 
                to trade agreements entered into under subsection (b) 
                after September 30, 2001, and before October 1, 2005, 
                if (and only if)--
                          (i) the President requests such extension 
                        under paragraph (2); and
                          (ii) neither House of the Congress adopts an 
                        extension disapproval resolution under 
                        paragraph (5) before October 1, 2001.
          (2) Report to congress by the president.--If the President is 
        of the opinion that the trade authorities procedures should be 
        extended to implementing bills described in paragraph (1)(B), 
        the President shall submit to the Congress, not later than July 
        1, 2001, a written report that contains a request for such 
        extension, together with--
                  (A) a description of all trade agreements that have 
                been negotiated under subsection (b) and the 
                anticipated schedule for submitting such agreements to 
                the Congress for approval;
                  (B) a description of the progress that has been made 
                in negotiations to achieve the purposes, policies, and 
                objectives of this title, and a statement that such 
                progress justifies the continuation of negotiations; 
                and
                  (C) a statement of the reasons why the extension is 
                needed to complete the negotiations.
          (3) Report to congress by the advisory committee.--The 
        President shall promptly inform the Advisory Committee for 
        Trade Policy and Negotiations established under section 135 of 
        the Trade Act of 1974 (19 U.S.C. 2155) of the President's 
        decision to submit a report to the Congress under paragraph 
        (2). The Advisory Committee shall submit to the Congress as 
        soon as practicable, but not later than August 1, 2001, a 
        written report that contains--
                  (A) its views regarding the progress that has been 
                made in negotiations to achieve the purposes, policies, 
                and objectives of this title; and
                  (B) a statement of its views, and the reasons 
                therefor, regarding whether the extension requested 
                under paragraph (2) should be approved or disapproved.
          (4) Reports may be classified.--The reports submitted to the 
        Congress under paragraphs (2) and (3), or any portion of such 
        reports, may be classified to the extent the President 
        determines appropriate.
          (5) Extension disapproval resolutions.--(A) For purposes of 
        paragraph (1), the term ``extension disapproval resolution'' 
        means a resolution of either House of the Congress, the sole 
        matter after the resolving clause of which is as follows: 
        ``That the ____ disapproves the request of the President for 
        the extension, under section 103(c)(1)(B)(i) of the Reciprocal 
        Trade Agreement Authorities Act of 1997, of the provisions of 
        section 151 of the Trade Act of 1974 to any implementing bill 
        submitted with respect to any trade agreement entered into 
        under section 103(b) of the Reciprocal Trade Agreement 
        Authorities Act of 1997 after September 30, 2001.'', with the 
        blank space being filled with the name of the resolving House 
        of the Congress.
          (B) Extension disapproval resolutions--
                  (i) may be introduced in either House of the Congress 
                by any member of such House; and
                  (ii) shall be referred, in the House of 
                Representatives, to the Committee on Ways and Means 
                and, in addition, to the Committee on Rules.
          (C) The provisions of sections 152 (d) and (e) of the Trade 
        Act of 1974 (19 U.S.C. 2192 (d) and (e)) (relating to the floor 
        consideration of certain resolutions in the House and Senate) 
        apply to extension disapproval resolutions.
          (D) It is not in order for--
                  (i) the Senate to consider any extension disapproval 
                resolution not reported by the Committee on Finance;
                  (ii) the House of Representatives to consider any 
                extension disapproval resolution not reported by the 
                Committee on Ways and Means and, in addition, by the 
                Committee on Rules; or
                  (iii) either House of the Congress to consider an 
                extension disapproval resolution after September 30, 
                2001.

SEC. 104. CONSULTATIONS.

  (a) Notice and Consultation Before Negotiation.--
          (1) In general.--The President, with respect to any agreement 
        that is subject to the provisions of section 103(b), shall--
                  (A) provide, at least 90 calendar days before 
                initiating negotiations, written notice to the Congress 
                of the President's intention to enter into the 
                negotiations and set forth therein the date the 
                President intends to initiate such negotiations, the 
                specific United States objectives for the negotiations, 
                and whether the President intends to seek an agreement, 
                or changes to an existing agreement; and
                  (B) before and after submission of the notice, 
                consult regarding the negotiations with the Committee 
                on Finance of the Senate and the Committee on Ways and 
                Means of the House of Representatives and such other 
                committees of the House and Senate as the President 
                deems appropriate.
          (2) Consultations regarding negotiations on certain 
        objectives.--
                  (A) Consultation.--In addition to the requirements 
                set forth in paragraph (1), before initiating 
                negotiations with respect to a trade agreement subject 
                to section 103(b) where the subject matter of such 
                negotiations is directly related to the principal trade 
                negotiating objectives set forth in section 102(b)(1) 
                or section 102(b)(7), the President shall consult with 
                the Committee on Ways and Means of the House of 
                Representatives and the Committee on Finance of the 
                Senate and with the appropriate advisory groups 
                established under section 135 of the Trade Act of 1974 
                with respect to such negotiations.
                  (B) Scope.--The consultations described in 
                subparagraph (A) shall concern the manner in which the 
                negotiation will address the objective of reducing or 
                eliminating a specific tariff or nontariff barrier or 
                foreign government policy or practice directly related 
                to trade that decreases market opportunities for United 
                States exports or otherwise distorts United States 
                trade.
          (3) Negotiations regarding agriculture.--Before initiating 
        negotiations the subject matter of which is directly related to 
        the subject matter under section 102(b)(6)(A) with any country, 
        the President shall assess whether United States tariffs on 
        agriculture products that were bound under the Uruguay Round 
        Agreements are lower than the tariffs bound by that country. In 
        addition, the President shall consider whether the tariff 
        levels bound and applied throughout the world with respect to 
        imports from the United States are higher than United States 
        tariffs and whether the negotiation provides an opportunity to 
        address any such disparity. The President shall consult with 
        the Committee on Ways and Means and the Committee on 
        Agriculture of the House of Representatives and the Committee 
        on Finance and the Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, and 
        Forestry of the Senate concerning the results of the 
        assessment, whether it is appropriate for the United States to 
        agree to further tariff reductionsbased on the conclusions 
reached in the assessment, and how all applicable negotiating 
objectives will be met.
  (b) Consultation With Congress Before Agreements Entered Into.--
          (1) Consultation.--Before entering into any trade agreement 
        under section 103(b), the President shall consult with--
                  (A) the Committee on Ways and Means of the House of 
                Representatives and the Committee on Finance of the 
                Senate; and
                  (B) each other committee of the House and the Senate, 
                and each joint committee of the Congress, which has 
                jurisdiction over legislation involving subject matters 
                which would be affected by the trade agreement.
          (2) Scope.--The consultation described in paragraph (1) shall 
        include consultation with respect to--
                  (A) the nature of the agreement;
                  (B) how and to what extent the agreement will achieve 
                the applicable purposes, policies, and objectives of 
                this title; and
                  (C) the implementation of the agreement under section 
                105, including the general effect of the agreement on 
                existing laws.
  (c) Advisory Committee Reports.--The report required under section 
135(e)(1) of the Trade Act of 1974 regarding any trade agreement 
entered into under section 103 (a) or (b) of this Act shall be provided 
to the President, the Congress, and the United States Trade 
Representative not later than 30 days after the date on which the 
President notifies the Congress under section 103(a)(1) or 105(a)(1)(A) 
of the President's intention to enter into the agreement.

SEC. 105. IMPLEMENTATION OF TRADE AGREEMENTS.

  (a) In General.--
          (1) Notification and submission.--Any agreement entered into 
        under section 103(b) shall enter into force with respect to the 
        United States if (and only if)--
                  (A) the President, at least 90 calendar days before 
                the day on which the President enters into the trade 
                agreement, notifies the House of Representatives and 
                the Senate of the President's intention to enter into 
                the agreement, and promptly thereafter publishes notice 
                of such intention in the Federal Register;
                  (B) within 60 days after entering into the agreement, 
                the President submits to the Congress a description of 
                those changes to existing laws that the President 
                considers would be required in order to bring the 
                United States into compliance with the agreement;
                  (C) after entering into the agreement, the President 
                submits a copy of the final legal text of the 
                agreement, together with--
                          (i) a draft of an implementing bill described 
                        in section 103(b)(3);
                          (ii) a statement of any administrative action 
                        proposed to implement the trade agreement; and
                          (iii) the supporting information described in 
                        paragraph (2); and
                  (D) the implementing bill is enacted into law.
          (2) Supporting information.--The supporting information 
        required under paragraph (1)(C)(iii) consists of--
                  (A) an explanation as to how the implementing bill 
                and proposed administrative action will change or 
                affect existing law; and
                  (B) a statement--
                          (i) asserting that the agreement makes 
                        progress in achieving the applicable purposes, 
                        policies, and objectives of this title;
                          (ii) setting forth the reasons of the 
                        President regarding--
                                  (I) how and to what extent the 
                                agreement makes progress in achieving 
                                the applicable purposes, policies, and 
                                objectives referred to in clause (i);
                                  (II) whether and how the agreement 
                                changes provisions of an agreement 
                                previously negotiated;
                                  (III) how the agreement serves the 
                                interests of United States commerce; 
                                and
                                  (IV) how the implementing bill meets 
                                the standards set forth in section 
                                103(b)(3).
          (3) Reciprocal benefits.--In order to ensure that a foreign 
        country that is not a party to a trade agreement entered into 
        under section 103(b) does not receive benefits under the 
        agreement unless the country is also subject to the obligations 
        under the agreement, the implementing bill submitted with 
        respect to the agreement shall provide that the benefits and 
        obligations under the agreement apply only to the parties to 
        the agreement, if such application is consistent with the terms 
        of the agreement. The implementing bill may also provide that 
        the benefits and obligations under the agreement do not apply 
        uniformly to all parties to the agreement, if such application 
        is consistent with the terms of the agreement.
  (b) Limitations on Trade Authorities Procedures.--
          (1) For lack of consultations.--
                  (A) In general.--The trade authorities procedures 
                shall not apply to any implementing bill submitted with 
                respect to a trade agreement entered into under section 
                103(b) if during the 60-day period beginning on the 
                date that one House of Congress agrees to a procedural 
                disapproval resolution for lack of notice or 
                consultations with respect to that trade agreement, the 
                other House separately agrees to a procedural 
                disapproval resolution with respect to that agreement.
                  (B) Procedural disapproval resolution.--For purposes 
                of this paragraph, the term ``procedural disapproval 
                resolution'' means a resolution of either House of 
                Congress, the sole matter after the resolving clause of 
                which is as follows: ``That the President has failed or 
                refused to notify or consult (as the case may be) with 
                Congress in accordance with section 104 or 105 of the 
                Reciprocal Trade Agreement Authorities Act of 1997 on 
                negotiations with respect to, or entering into, a trade 
                agreement to which section 103(b) of that Act applies 
                and, therefore, the provisions of section 151 of the 
                Trade Act of 1974 shall not apply to any implementing 
                bill submitted with respect to that trade agreement.''.
          (2) Procedures for considering resolutions.--(A) Procedural 
        disapproval resolutions--
                  (i) in the House of Representatives--
                          (I) shall be introduced by the chairman or 
                        ranking minority member of the Committee on 
                        Ways and Means or the chairman or ranking 
                        minority member of the Committee on Rules;
                          (II) shall be referred to the Committee on 
                        Ways and Means and, in addition, to the 
                        Committee on Rules; and
                          (III) may not be amended by either Committee; 
                        and
                  (ii) in the Senate shall be original resolutions of 
                the Committee on Finance.
          (B) The provisions of section 152 (d) and (e) of the Trade 
        Act of 1974 (19 U.S.C. 2192 (d) and (e)) (relating to the floor 
        consideration of certain resolutions in the House and Senate) 
        apply to procedural disapproval resolutions.
          (C) It is not in order for the House of Representatives to 
        consider any procedural disapproval resolution not reported by 
        the Committee on Ways and Means and, in addition, by the 
        Committee on Rules.
  (c) Rules of House of Representatives and Senate.--Subsection (b) of 
this section and section 103(c) are enacted by the Congress--
          (1) as an exercise of the rulemaking power of the House of 
        Representatives and the Senate, respectively, and as such are 
        deemed a part of the rules of each House, respectively, and 
        such procedures supersede other rules only to the extent that 
        they are inconsistent with such other rules; and
          (2) with the full recognition of the constitutional right of 
        either House to change the rules (so far as relating to the 
        procedures of that House) at any time, in the same manner, and 
        to the same extent as any other rule of that House.

SEC. 106. TREATMENT OF CERTAIN TRADE AGREEMENTS.

  (a) Certain Agreements.--Notwithstanding section 103(b)(2), if an 
agreement to which section 103(b) applies--
          (1) is entered into under the auspices of the World Trade 
        Organization regarding trade in information technology 
        products,
          (2) is entered into under the auspices of the World Trade 
        Organization regarding extended negotiations on financial 
        services as described in section 135(a) of the Uruguay Round 
        Agreements Act (19 U.S.C. 3555(a)),
          (3) is entered into under the auspices of the World Trade 
        Organization regarding the rules of origin work program 
        described in Article 9 of the Agreement on Rules of Origin 
        referred to in section 101(d)(10) of the Uruguay Round 
        Agreements Act (19 U.S.C. 3511(d)(10)), or
          (4) is entered into with Chile,
and results from negotiations that were commenced before the date of 
the enactment of this Act, subsection (b) shall apply.
  (b) Treatment of Agreements.--In the case of any agreement to which 
subsection (a) applies--
          (1) the applicability of the trade authorities procedures to 
        implementing bills shall be determined without regard to the 
        requirements of section 104(a), and any procedural disapproval 
        resolution under section 105(b)(1)(B) shall not be in order on 
        the basis of a failure or refusal to comply with the provisions 
        of section 104(a); and
          (2) the President shall consult regarding the negotiations 
        described in subsection (a) with the committees described in 
        section 104(a)(1)(B) as soon as feasible after the enactment of 
        this Act.

SEC. 107. CHIEF AGRICULTURAL NEGOTIATOR.

  (a) Establishment of Position.--There shall be in the Office of the 
United States Trade Representative a Chief Agricultural Negotiator, who 
shall be appointed by the President, by and with the advice and consent 
of the Senate. The Chief Agricultural Negotiator shall hold office at 
the pleasure of the President and shall have the rank of Ambassador.
  (b) Functions.--The Chief Agricultural Negotiator shall have as his 
or her primary function the conduct of trade negotiations relating to 
agricultural commodities and shall have such other functions as the 
United States Trade Representative may direct.
  (c) Compensation.--The Chief Agricultural Negotiator shall be paid at 
the highest rate of basic pay payable to a member of the Senior 
Executive Service.

SEC. 108. CONFORMING AMENDMENTS.

  (a) In General.--Title I of the Trade Act of 1974 (19 U.S.C. 2111 et 
seq.) is amended as follows:
          (1) Implementing bill.--
                  (A) Section 151(b)(1) (19 U.S.C. 2191(b)(1)) is 
                amended by striking ``section 1103(a)(1) of the Omnibus 
                Trade and Competitiveness Act of 1988, or section 282 
                of the Uruguay Round Agreements Act'' and inserting 
                ``section 282 of the Uruguay Round Agreements Act, or 
                section 105(a)(1) of the Reciprocal Trade Agreement 
                Authorities Act of 1997''.
                  (B) Section 151(c)(1) (19 U.S.C. 2191(c)(1)) is 
                amended by striking ``or section 282 of the Uruguay 
                Round Agreements Act'' and inserting ``, section 282 of 
                the Uruguay Round Agreements Act, or section 105(a)(1) 
                of the Reciprocal Trade Agreement Authorities Act of 
                1997''.
          (2) Advice from international trade commission.--Section 131 
        (19 U.S.C. 2151) is amended--
                  (A) in subsection (a)--
                          (i) in paragraph (1), by striking ``section 
                        123 of this Act or section 1102 (a) or (c) of 
                        the Omnibus Trade and Competitiveness Act of 
                        1988,'' and inserting ``section 123 of this Act 
                        or section 103(a) or (b) of the Reciprocal 
                        Trade Agreement Authorities Act of 1997,''; and
                          (ii) in paragraph (2), by striking ``section 
                        1102 (b) or (c) of the Omnibus Trade and 
                        Competitiveness Act of 1988'' and inserting 
                        ``section 103(b) of the Reciprocal Trade 
                        Agreement Authorities Act of 1997'';
                  (B) in subsection (b), by striking ``section 
                1102(a)(3)(A)'' and inserting ``section 103(a)(3)(A) of 
                the Reciprocal Trade Agreement Authorities Act of 
                1997'' before the end period; and
                  (C) in subsection (c), by striking ``section 1102 of 
                the Omnibus Trade and Competitiveness Act of 1988,'' 
                and inserting ``section 103 of the Reciprocal Trade 
                Agreement Authorities Act of 1997,''.
          (3) Hearings and advice.--Sections 132, 133(a), and 134(a) 
        (19 U.S.C. 2152, 2153(a), and 2154(a)) are each amended by 
        striking ``section 1102 of the Omnibus Trade and 
        Competitiveness Act of 1988,'' each place it appears and 
        inserting ``section 103 of the Reciprocal Trade Agreement 
        Authorities Act of 1997,''.
          (4) Prerequisites for offers.--Section 134(b) (19 U.S.C. 
        2154(b)) is amended by striking ``section 1102 of the Omnibus 
        Trade and Competitiveness Act of 1988'' and inserting ``section 
        103 of the Reciprocal Trade Agreement Authorities Act of 
        1997''.
          (5) Advice from private and public sectors.--Section 135 (19 
        U.S.C. 2155) is amended--
                  (A) in subsection (a)(1)(A), by striking ``section 
                1102 of the Omnibus Trade and Competitiveness Act of 
                1988'' and inserting ``section 103 of the Reciprocal 
                Trade Agreement Authorities Act of 1997'';
                  (B) in subsection (e)(1)--
                          (i) by striking ``section 1102 of the Omnibus 
                        Trade and Competitiveness Act of 1988'' each 
                        place it appears and inserting ``section 103 of 
                        the Reciprocal Trade Agreement Authorities Act 
                        of 1997''; and
                          (ii) by striking ``section 1103(a)(1)(A) of 
                        such Act of 1988'' and inserting ``section 
                        105(a)(1)(A) of the Reciprocal Trade Agreement 
                        Authorities Act of 1997''; and
                  (C) in subsection (e)(2), by striking ``section 1101 
                of the Omnibus Trade and Competitiveness Act of 1988'' 
                and inserting ``section 102 of the Reciprocal Trade 
                Agreement Authorities Act of 1997''.
          (6) Transmission of agreements to congress.--Section 162(a) 
        (19 U.S.C. 2212(a)) is amended by striking ``or under section 
        1102 of the Omnibus Trade and Competitiveness Act of 1988'' and 
        inserting ``or under section 103 of the Reciprocal Trade 
        Agreement Authorities Act of 1997''.
  (b) Application of Certain Provisions.--For purposes of applying 
sections 125, 126, and 127 of the Trade Act of 1974 (19 U.S.C. 2135, 
2136(a), and 2137)--
          (1) any trade agreement entered into under section 103 shall 
        be treated as an agreement entered into under section 101 or 
        102, as appropriate, of the Trade Act of 1974 (19 U.S.C. 2111 
        or 2112); and
          (2) any proclamation or Executive order issued pursuant to a 
        trade agreement entered into under section 103 shall be treated 
        as a proclamation or Executive order issued pursuant to a trade 
        agreement entered into under section 102 of the Trade Act of 
        1974.

SEC. 109. DEFINITIONS.

  In this title:
          (1) United states person.--The term ``United States person'' 
        means--
                  (A) a United States citizen;
                  (B) a partnership, corporation, or other legal entity 
                organized under the laws of the United States; and
                  (C) a partnership, corporation, or other legal entity 
                that is organized under the laws of a foreign country 
                and is controlled by entities described in subparagraph 
                (B) or United States citizens, or both.
          (2) Uruguay round agreements.--The term ``Uruguay Round 
        Agreements'' has the meaning given that term in section 2(7) of 
        the Uruguay Round Agreements Act (19 U.S.C. 3501(7)).
          (3) World trade organization.--The term ``World Trade 
        Organization'' means the organization established pursuant to 
        the WTO Agreement.
          (4) WTO agreement.--The term ``WTO Agreement'' means the 
        Agreement Establishing the World Trade Organization entered 
        into on April 15, 1994.

                 TITLE II--TRADE ADJUSTMENT ASSISTANCE

SEC. 201. ADJUSTMENT ASSISTANCE FOR WORKERS.

  Section 245 of the Trade Act of 1974 (19 U.S.C. 2317) is amended--
          (1) in subsection (a) by striking ``1993'' and all that 
        follows through ``1998'' and inserting ``1998, 1999, and 
        2000''; and
          (2) in subsection (b) by striking ``1994'' and all that 
        follows through ``1998'' and inserting ``1998, 1999, and 
        2000''.

SEC. 202. ADJUSTMENT ASSISTANCE FOR FIRMS.

  Section 256(b) of the Trade Act of 1974 (19 U.S.C. 2346(b)) is 
amended by striking ``1993'' and all that follows through ``1998'' and 
inserting ``1998, 1999, and 2000,''.

SEC. 203. GENERAL ACCOUNTING OFFICE REPORT.

  Section 280(a) of the Trade Act of 1974 (19 U.S.C. 2391(a)) is 
amended--
          (1) by striking ``2, 3, and 4'' and inserting ``2 and 3''; 
        and
          (2) by striking ``January 31, 1980'' and inserting ``October 
        1, 1999''.

SEC. 204. TERMINATION.

  Section 285(c) of the Trade Act of 1974 (19 U.S.C. 2271 note) is 
amended in paragraphs (1) and (2)(A)(i) by striking ``1998'' and 
inserting ``2000''.

SEC. 205. EFFECTIVE DATE.

  The amendments made by this title take effect on the date of the 
enactment of this Act.

                     TITLE III--REVENUE PROVISIONS

SEC. 301. REPEAL OF SPECIAL RULE FOR RENTAL USE OF VACATION HOMES, 
                    ETC., FOR LESS THAN 15 DAYS.

  (a) In General.--Section 280A of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 
(relating to disallowance of certain expenses in connection with 
business use of home, rental of vacation homes, etc.) is amended by 
striking subsection (g).
  (b) No Basis Reduction Unless Depreciation Claimed.--Section 1016 of 
such Code is amended by redesignating subsection (e) as subsection (f) 
and by inserting after subsection (d) the following new subsection:
  ``(e) Special Rule Where Rental Use of Vacation Home, Etc., for Less 
Than 15 Days.--If a dwelling unit is used during the taxable year by 
the taxpayer as a residence and such dwelling unit is actually rented 
for less than 15 days during the taxable year, the reduction under 
subsection (a)(2) by reason of such rental use in any taxable year 
beginning after December 31, 1997, shall not exceed the depreciation 
deduction allowed for such rental use.''.
  (c) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section shall apply 
to taxable years beginning after December 31, 1997.

                            I. INTRODUCTION

                         A. Purpose and Summary

    Title I of H.R. 2621, as amended by the Committee, would 
establish special ``fast track'' provisions for the 
consideration of legislation to implement trade agreements. 
These special procedures, which were first enacted in 1974, 
have expired with respect to agreements entered into after 
April 15, 1994. The purpose of this special approval process 
has been to preserve the constitutional role and to fulfill the 
legislative responsibility of Congress with respect to trade 
agreements. At the same time, the process ensures certain and 
expeditious action on the results of the negotiations and on 
the implementing bill, with no amendments.
    Title I of H.R. 2621, as amended, would put in place 
special procedures for implementing trade agreements entered 
into before October 1, 2001, with the opportunity for an 
extension to cover agreements entered into before October 1, 
2005. These procedures are similar to the expired provisions, 
with modifications to clarify their application so that they 
apply only to provisions that are directly related to the trade 
negotiating objectives set forth in the bill, or that define 
and clarify or are related to, the operation and effect of the 
trade agreement.
    Title II of H.R. 2621 would re-authorize the general Trade 
Adjustment Assistance (TAA), NAFTA-related TAA, and TAA for 
firms programs through fiscal year 2000. Title II also would 
require that the General Accounting Office conduct a study of 
the three TAA programs and report the results to the Congress 
no later than October 1, 1999. These provisions would be 
effective on the date of enactment.

                 B. Background and Need for Legislation

    Certain trade agreements cannot enter into force as a 
matter of U.S. law unless implementing legislation approving 
the agreement and any changes to U.S. law is enacted into law. 
Certain procedures, commonly referred to as ``fast track,'' 
were first authorized in the Trade Act of 1974 in order to 
implement trade agreements. These procedures were first used 
with respect to the GATT Tokyo Round Agreements, which were 
approved and implemented in the Trade Agreements Act of 1979. 
The expedited procedures for the implementation of multilateral 
trade agreements have not been significantly altered since 1974 
but were expanded in 1984 to apply to bilateral agreements. 
Extended through section 1102(c) of the Omnibus Trade and 
Competitiveness Act of 1988, and modified to authorize the 
President to enter into bilateral trade agreements, fast track 
procedures were most recently used to implement the Uruguay 
Round Agreements of GATT and the North American Free Trade 
Agreement. That fast track negotiating authority as extended in 
1991 and 1993, applied only with respect to new agreements 
entered into before April 15, 1994.
    These special procedures required the President, before 
entering into any trade agreement, to consult with Congress and 
to provide Congress advance notice of his intent to enter into 
an agreement. After entering into the agreement, the President 
was required to submit the draft agreement, implementing 
legislation, and a statement of administrative action. The 
President also consulted with Congressional committees of 
jurisdiction on the content of the implementing bill. 
Amendments to the legislation were not permitted once the bill 
was introduced; the committee and floor actions consisted of 
``up or down'' votes on the bill as introduced.
    The Committee believes that fast track has been a highly 
effective tool in obtaining the passage of legislation 
implementing a wide variety of trade agreements. Because of 
these agreements, the Committee believes that the United States 
has been able to make substantial progress in opening markets, 
lowering tariffs, and regulating and ending non-tariff barriers 
to trade. These agreements are extremely beneficial in creating 
much-needed jobs, stimulating the economy, raising the standard 
of living for American families, and reducing the budget 
deficit. The Committee believes that the only way that the 
United States can continue to negotiate these beneficial 
agreements is through the well-proven tool of fast track 
because it ensures certain and expeditious consideration of 
trade legislation while giving Congress a strong role to play 
during negotiation and implementation of trade agreements. In 
addition, fast track gives U.S. trading partners confidence 
that an agreement agreed by the United States will not be 
reopened during the implementing process. Accordingly, H.R. 
2621, as amended, would extend many of the same fast track 
provisions of the 1988 Act to future agreements.
    The President's fiscal year 1998 budget contained 
provisions to extend all three TAA programs. Over the past 
year, the Committee has undertaken an evaluation not only of 
general TAA and NAFTA-related TAA, but also TAA for firms. As a 
result of these evaluations, the Committee believes these 
programs should be re-authorized through fiscal year 2000.

                         C. Legislative History

    H.R. 2621, the Reciprocal Trade Agreement Authorities Act 
of 1997, was introduced on October 7, 1997, by Chairman Archer, 
on behalf of himself, Mr. Crane, and Mr. Dreier. The bill was 
referred to the Committee on Ways and Means, and in addition to 
the Committee on Rules.
    On October 8, the Committee on Ways and Means met to 
consider H.R. 2621. At that time, Chairman Archer offered an 
amendment in the nature of a substitute. The Committee agreed 
to two amendments to the amendment in the nature of a 
substitute. First, the Committee agreed, by a voice vote, to an 
amendment that would give guidance to U.S. negotiators 
concerning unfair trade laws. In addition, the Committee 
agreed, also by voice vote, to an en bloc amendment that would 
make clear that all private sector advisory groups would be 
consulted by the Administration on negotiations and that would 
strike the word ``nondiscriminatory'' from the principal 
negotiating objective concerning labor and the environment in 
the amendment in the nature of a substitute. The Committee then 
ordered the bill favorably reported, as amended, by a record 
vote of 24 to 14.

                      II. EXPLANATION OF THE BILL

                A. Title I--Trade Authorities Procedures

                      1. SECTION 101: SHORT TITLE

Explanation of provision

    The short title of the bill is the ``Reciprocal Trade 
Agreement Authorities Act of 1997.''

        2. SECTION 102(a) AND (b): TRADE NEGOTIATING OBJECTIVES

Present/expired law

    Section 1101(a) of the Omnibus Trade and Competitiveness 
Act of 1988 (the 1988 Act) set forth overall negotiating 
objectives for concluding trade agreements. These objectives 
were to obtain more open, equitable, and reciprocal market 
access, the reduction or elimination of barriers and other 
trade-distorting policies and practices, and a more effective 
system of international trading disciplines and procedures. 
Section 1102(b) set forth the following principle trade 
negotiating objectives: dispute settlement, transparency, 
developing countries, current account surpluses, trade and 
monetary coordination, agriculture, unfair trade practices, 
trade in services, intellectual property, foreign direct 
investment, safeguards, specific barriers, worker rights, 
access to high technology, and border taxes.

Explanation of provision

    Section 102 would establish the following overall 
negotiating objectives: obtaining more open, equitable, and 
reciprocal market access; obtaining the reduction or 
elimination of barriers and other trade-distorting policies and 
practices; further strengthening the system of international 
trading disciplines and procedures, including dispute 
settlement; and fostering economic growth and full employment 
in the U.S. and the global economy.
    In addition, section 102 would establish the principal 
trade negotiating objectives for concluding trade agreements, 
as follows:
          Trade barriers and distortions:
                  expanding competitive market opportunities 
                for U.S. exports and obtaining fairer and more 
                open conditions of trade by reducing or 
                eliminating tariff and nontariff barriers and 
                policies and practices of foreign governments 
                directly related to trade that decrease market 
                opportunities for U.S. exports and distort U.S. 
                trade;
                  obtaining reciprocal tariff and nontariff 
                barrier elimination agreements, with particular 
                attention to products covered in section 111(b) 
                of the Uruguay Round Agreements Act;
          Services;
          Foreign investment;
          Intellectual property, including:
                  ensuring accelerated implementation of the 
                Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of 
                Intellectual Property Rights of the Uruguay 
                Round Agreements, particularly with respect to 
                those countries facing the lengthiest 
                transition periods for full compliance by 
                developing countries; achieving improvements in 
                that Agreement; and ensuring that any future 
                agreement provide protections at least as 
                strong as under the NAFTA;
                   providing strong protection for new and 
                emerging technologies, preventing or 
                eliminating discrimination concerning 
                intellectual property rights, providing strong 
                enforcement, and securing market access 
                opportunities;
          Transparency;
          Agriculture: obtaining competitive market 
        opportunities for U.S. exports in foreign markets 
        substantially equivalent to the competitive 
        opportunities afforded foreign exports in U.S. markets 
        and achieving fairer and more open conditions of trade;
          Labor, the environment, and other matters: addressing 
        those aspects of foreign government policies and 
        practices regarding labor, the environment, and other 
        matters that are directly related to trade:
                  to ensure that foreign labor, environmental, 
                health or safety policies and practices do not 
                arbitrarily or unjustifiably discriminate or 
                serve as disguised barriers to trade;
                  to ensure that foreign governments do not 
                derogate from or waive existing domestic 
                environmental, health, safety, or labor 
                measures, including measures that deter 
                exploitative child labor, as an encouragement 
                to gain competitive advantage in international 
                trade or investment; the objective is not 
                intended to address changes that are consistent 
                with sound macroeconomic development.
          Extended WTO negotiations: concerning extended WTO 
        negotiations on financial services, civil aircraft, and 
        rules of origin.

Reason for change

    In the list of primary negotiating objectives in H.R. 2621, 
as amended, the Committee intends to update objectives from the 
1988 Act which were outdated because they referred to the 
Uruguay Round. Other objectives were broadened to encompass 
more than one objective from the 1988 Act and to include those 
practices and policies that are directly related to trade and 
serve as trade barriers or distortions to trade. For instance, 
it is the Committee's intent that the negotiating objective 
concerning specific barriers to trade include issues such as 
safeguards, dispute settlement, unfair trade laws (including 
antidumping, subsidies, safeguard actions, and laws concerning 
unfair practices in import trade), access to high technology, 
government procurement, technical standards, and sanitary and 
phytosanitary standards.
    The language in the first negotiating objective covers any 
tariff or non-tariff barrier as well as any policy or practice 
that is directly related to trade, regardless of whether the 
barrier is imposed at the foreign border or at some other 
point. Moreover, H.R. 2621, as amended, addresses policies and 
practices, not merely a law ``on its face.'' This includes a 
policy or practice that has the de facto effect of impeding 
U.S. imports or exports, not whether the law is only a de jure 
barrier. In addition, the concept ``policy or practice'' covers 
barriers imposed under, for example, a regulatory, 
administrative, adjudicatory, and investigatory exercise of any 
level of foreign government authority, and is not limited to 
statutory barriers. Finally, it is the Committee's intention 
that the phrase ``to obtain fairer and more open conditions of 
trade by reducing or eliminating tariff and nontariff 
barriers'' applies to barriers imposed by foreign governments 
as well as domestic barriers, if any.
    In section 102(b)(1)(B), the Committee intends that the 
Administration continue to seek, on a priority basis, the 
elimination of duties on a reciprocal basis for products 
covered in section 111(b) of the Uruguay Round Agreements Act, 
as described in page 45 of the Statement of Administrative 
Action accompanying that Act. Although the President was 
successful in obtaining the reciprocal elimination of duties 
for a number of products contained in that list as part of the 
Information Technology Agreement negotiated under the auspices 
of the WTO, there are a number of products not included in that 
Agreement, including paper and wood products. It is the 
Committee's intention that the Administration pay particular 
attention to the elimination of tariffs on these products, 
which could result in substantial benefits to U.S. industry and 
its workers. For many of these products, U.S. producers remain 
at a significant competitive disadvantage while foreign 
suppliers are able to expand capacity behind high tariff walls. 
In other sectors, tariff inequities are aggravated by tariff 
escalation, which occurs when a country establishes low or zero 
tariffs for raw materials but maintains relatively high tariffs 
for processed products. The Committee intends that the 
Administration continue to pursue ending such practices for the 
sectors covered by the proclamation authority provided in 
section 111(b).
    With respect to the negotiating objective concerning 
intellectual property, the Committee notes that obtaining 
improved intellectual property through bilateral and 
multilateral efforts is an important and continuing trade 
policy priority for the United States. Accordingly, the 
Committee intends that the United States seek accelerated and 
full implementation of the Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects 
of Intellectual Property negotiated under in the Uruguay Round.
    With respect to the negotiating objective relating to 
reciprocal trade in agriculture, the Committee intends that the 
United States obtain a level playing field throughout the world 
for agriculture products, both for U.S. exporters seeking 
market access abroad as well as for U.S. products that are 
import-sensitive. The Committee believes that U.S. negotiators 
should seek to accomplish the objectives set forth in section 
102(b)(6), including reducing or eliminating foreign tariffs 
and subsidies and, in addition, eliminating practices that 
decrease U.S. market access or distort U.S. or foreign markets, 
including state trading enterprises; unjustified trade 
restrictions or commercial requirements affecting new 
technologies, including biotechnology; unjustified sanitary 
orphytosanitary measures not based on scientific principles in 
contravention of WTO standards; other unjustified barriers to trade; 
and restrictive rules in the administration of tariff rate quotas.
    With respect to the seventh principal trade negotiating 
objective, concerning ``labor, the environment, and other 
matters that are directly related to trade,'' the Committee 
intends this language to include those particular aspects of 
practices and policies regarding labor, environment, and other 
matters that are themselves directly related to trade and serve 
as trade barriers or distortions to trade. The Committee 
recognizes that in certain circumstances, aspects of practices 
and policies involving labor, the environment, and other 
matters may decrease market opportunities for U.S. exports or 
otherwise distort U.S. trade. Those aspects of these policies 
and practices may accordingly be included in trade agreements 
whose implementation qualifies for fast track. In determining 
whether foreign government policies and practices are in fact 
directly related to trade, the Committee intends that the USTR 
consult closely with the Congress, the private sector, and 
other interested groups.
    By contrast, fast track is not intended to implement other 
more general policy goals. Any side agreements that the 
President may enter, using his executive authorities, with 
respect to such matters would be subject to normal legislative 
procedures.
    The Committee intends that ``directly related to trade'' in 
this context include the use of labor and environmental laws by 
another country to restrict U.S. access to its market. 
Specifically, if another country sought to use labor or 
environmental restrictions to limit trade improperly, the 
United States should be able to respond in trade terms. The 
Committee intends that the United States should be able to use 
trade to respond to a foreign government's use of sanitary or 
phytosanitary restrictions that do not meet the requirements of 
a trade agreement, including those that are discriminatory or 
not based on sound science. Similarly, the Committee intends 
that the United States should be able to use trade to respond 
to valid U.S. health and safety concerns stemming from the lack 
of environmental protection in another country affecting 
products which that country is attempting to export to the 
United States. For example, the United States should be able to 
block the importation of contaminated fish caught in waters 
polluted by unregulated factories in another country, as long 
as the restriction is not discriminatory and is based on sound 
science. In addition, agriculture products produced in another 
country should be prohibited from entry into the United States 
if they contain contaminants which threaten the health and 
safety of Americans.
    In addition, fast track procedures may be used with respect 
to ensuring that foreign governments do not derogate from or 
waive existing domestic environmental, health, safety, or labor 
measures, including measures that deter exploitative child 
labor, as an encouragement to gain competitive advantage in 
international trade or investment. This provision is not 
intended to address changes in a country's laws that are 
consistent with sound macroeconomic development. Rather, it is 
intended to address situations in which a country, in order to 
gain competitive advantage in international trade or 
investment, waives or derogates from existing measures. If a 
country must change existing measures because to do so would be 
sound macroeconomic policy, the Committee does not intend to 
address such behavior as long as it is not done to unfairly 
increase foreign investment or international trade.
    Finally, the Committee notes that the term ``international 
trade'' includes both imports and exports, as well as trade in 
services, trade-related investment, and trade-related 
intellectual property.

      3. SECTION 102(c): INTERNATIONAL ECONOMIC POLICY OBJECTIVES

Present/expired law

    No provision.

Explanation of provision

    Section 102(c) contains general international economic 
policy objectives, which are not subject to fast track, which 
the President should take into account. Such priorities 
include:
          Seeking to ensure that trade and environmental 
        policies are mutually supportive;
          Seeking to protect and preserve the environment and 
        enhance the international means for doing so, while 
        optimizing the use of the world's resources;
          Promoting respect for worker rights and the rights of 
        children and an understanding of the relationship 
        between trade and worker rights, particularly by 
        working with the ILO to encourage the observance and 
        enforcement of core labor standards;
          Supplementing and strengthening standards for 
        protection of intellectual property under appropriate 
        conventions administered by international organizations 
        other than the WTO.

Reason for change

    The Committee recognizes and expects that the President 
will take into account the relationship between trade 
agreements and other important priorities of the United States 
and strive to ensure that trade agreements entered into by the 
United States complement and reinforce other policy goals. 
Negotiations under the executive authorities of the President 
may occur on other policy goals and objectives, the results of 
which may or may not require changes in U.S. law. However, 
fast-track implementing procedures are reserved for measures 
that are: (1) directly related to trade; (2) serve as trade 
barriers or distortions; and (3) have been subject to 
consultations with the Congress and the private sector. By 
contrast, fast track procedures are not intended to be used to 
implement other, more general policy goals.

          4. SECTION 102(d) and (e): GUIDANCE FOR NEGOTIATORS

Present/expired law

    No provision.

Explanation of provision

    Section 102(d) contains certain guidance for U.S. 
negotiators in conducting negotiations. Specifically, U.S. 
negotiators would be required to take into account U.S. 
domestic objectives, including the protection of health and 
safety, essential security, environmental, consumer, and 
employment opportunity interests. USTR would be required to 
consult closely with the congressional advisers on trade policy 
and negotiations appointed under section 161 of the Trade Act 
of 1974. In addition, USTR would be required to preserve the 
ability of the United States to enforce vigorously its trade 
laws and avoid agreements which lessen the effectiveness of 
domestic and international disciplines on unfair trade.
    Finally, in determining whether to enter into negotiations 
with a particular country, section 102(e) would require the 
President to take into account whether that country has 
implemented its obligations under the Uruguay Round Agreements.

Reason for change

    The Committee intends that certain domestic objectives are 
taken into account byU.S. negotiators during negotiations. This 
guidance is not intended to force U.S. negotiators to seek U.S. 
standards on the listed issues in international agreements. Instead, in 
developing its position in trade negotiations, the Administration 
should keep in mind these important domestic priorities.
    In addition, the Committee intends that the Administration 
maintain close contacts with Congressional advisers on trade 
policy throughout the negotiation process. Such consultations 
must be both meaningful and timely. Finally, the Committee 
intends that negotiators preserve the ability of the United 
States to enforce rigorously its trade laws and to avoid 
agreements which lessen the effectiveness of unfair trade 
disciplines.

               5. SECTION 103: TRADE AGREEMENTS AUTHORITY

Present/expired law

    Tariff proclamation authority. Section 1102(a) of the 1988 
Act provided authority to the President to proclaim 
modifications in duties without the need for Congressional 
approval, subject to certain limitations. Specifically, for 
rates that exceed 5 percent ad valorem, the President could not 
reduce any rate of duty to a rate less than 50 percent of the 
rate of duty applying on the date of enactment. Rates at or 
below 5 percent could be reduced to zero. Any duty reduction 
that exceeded 50 percent of an existing duty higher than 5 
percent or any tariff increase had to be approved by Congress.
    Staging authority required that duty reductions on any 
article could not exceed 3 percent per year, or one-tenth of 
the total reduction, whichever is greater, except that staging 
was not required if the International Trade Commission 
determined there was no U.S. production of that article.
    Negotiation of bilateral agreements. Section 1102(c) of the 
1988 Act set forth three requirements for the negotiation of a 
bilateral agreement:
          The foreign country must request the negotiation of 
        the bilateral agreement;
          The agreement must make progress in meeting 
        applicable U.S. trade negotiating objectives; and
          The President must provide written notice of the 
        negotiations to the Committee on Ways and Means and the 
        Committee on Finance of the Senate and consult with 
        these committees. The negotiations could proceed unless 
        either Committee disapproved the negotiations within 60 
        days prior to the 90 calendar days advance notice 
        required of entry into an agreement (described below).
    Negotiation of multilateral non-tariff agreements. With 
respect to multilateral agreements, section 1102(b) of the 1988 
Act provided that whenever the President determines that any 
barrier to, or other distortion of, international trade unduly 
burdens or restricts the foreign trade of the United States or 
adversely affects the U.S. economy, or the imposition of any 
such barrier or distortion is likely to result in such a 
burden, restriction, or effect, he may enter into a trade 
agreement with the foreign countries involved. The agreement 
must provide for the reduction or elimination of such barrier 
or other distortion or prohibit or limit the imposition of such 
a barrier or distortion.
    Provisions qualifying for fast track procedures. Section 
1103(b)(1)(A) of the 1988 Act provided that fast track apply to 
implementing bills submitted with respect to any trade 
agreements entered into under the statute. Section 151(b)(1) of 
the Trade Act of 1974 further defined ``implementing bill'' as 
a bill containing provisions ``necessary or appropriate'' to 
implement the trade agreement, as well as provisions approving 
the agreement and the statement of administrative action.
    Time period. The authority applied with respect to 
agreements entered into before June 1, 1991, and until June 1, 
1993 unless Congress passed an extension disapproval 
resolution. The authority was then extended to April 15, 1994, 
to cover the Uruguay Round of multilateral negotiations under 
the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade.

Explanation of provision

    Proclamation authority. Section 103(a) would provide the 
President the authority to proclaim, without Congressional 
approval, certain duty modifications in a manner very similar 
to the expired provision. Specifically, for rates that exceed 5 
percent ad valorem, the President would not be authorized to 
reduce any rate of duty to a rate less than 50 percent of the 
rate of duty applying on the date of enactment. Rates at or 
below 5 percent ad valorem could be reduced to zero. Any duty 
reduction that exceeded 50 percent of an existing duty higher 
than 5 percent or any tariff increase would have to be approved 
by Congress. Staging authority would require that duty 
reductions on any article could not exceed 3 percent per year, 
or one-tenth of the total reduction, whichever is greater, 
except that staging would not be required if the International 
Trade Commission determined there is no U.S. production of that 
article.
    However, these limitations would not apply to reciprocal 
agreements to eliminate or harmonize duties negotiated under 
the auspices of the World Trade Organization or to interim 
agreements leading to the formation of a regional free trade 
agreement.
    Agreements on tariff and non-tariff barriers. Section 
103(b)(1) would authorize the President to enter into a trade 
agreement with a foreign country whenever he determined that 
any duty or other import restriction or any other barrier to or 
distortion of international trade unduly burdens or restricts 
the foreign trade of the United States or adversely affects the 
U.S. economy, or the imposition of any such barrier or 
distortion is likely to result in such a burden, restriction, 
or effect. The agreement must provide for the reduction or 
elimination of such barrier or other distortion or prohibit or 
limit the imposition of such a barrier or distortion. No 
distinction would be made between bilateral and multilateral 
agreements.
    Conditions. Section 103(b)(2) would provide that the 
special implementing bills procedures may be used only if the 
agreement makes progress in meeting the applicable objectives 
set forth in section 102 and the President satisfies the 
consultation requirements set forth in section 104.
    Bills qualifying for trade authorities procedures. Section 
103(b)(3)(A) would provide that bills implementing trade 
agreements may qualify for fast track procedures only if those 
bills consist solely of the following provisions:
          Provisions approving the trade agreement and 
        statement of administrative action;
          Provisions directly related to the principal 
        negotiating objectives, if those provisions are 
        necessary for the operation or implementation of U.S. 
        rights or obligations under the agreement;
          Provisions that define and clarify, or provisions 
        that are related to, the operation and effect of the 
        provisions of the trade agreement;
          Provisions to provide adjustment assistance to 
        workers and firms adversely affected by trade;
          Provisions necessary to comply with budget offset 
        requirements.
    Time period. Sections 3(a)(1)(A) and 3(b)(1) would extend 
fast track authority to agreements entered into before October 
1, 2001. In addition, an extension until October 1, 2005, would 
be permitted unless Congress passed a disapproval resolution, 
asdescribed under section 3(c).

Reason for change

    H.R. 2621, as amended, extends to the President the same 
authority to proclaim tariff modifications as under the 1988 
Act. In addition, the President would be given authority to 
negotiate reciprocal duty eliminations on a sectoral basis 
within the WTO forum as well as for an interim agreement 
leading to the formation of a regional free trade agreement. 
The Committee believes that the Information Technology 
Agreement recently negotiated by the President under the 
auspices of the WTO to eliminate tariffs for information 
technology products all over the world was a substantial 
accomplishment. The Committee recognizes, however, that the 
President's ability to carry out such agreements is limited 
because section 111(b) of the Uruguay Round Agreements Act 
provides the President with proclamation authority applicable 
only to a limited number of sectors, that is those that were 
negotiated multilaterally under the WTO and that were the 
subject of negotiations on reciprocal duty elimination (``zero-
for-zero'') or harmonization during the Uruguay Round. Because 
of the success that the Information Technology Agreement 
promises for U.S. businesses and U.S. workers, the Committee 
wishes to provide authority for this and similar WTO sector-
specific negotiations even if the sector had not been the 
subject of zero-for-zero negotiations during the Uruguay Round.
    H.R. 2621, as amended, would apply the same substantive and 
procedural requirements to all types of agreements, thus ending 
the special rules for bilateral versus multilateral agreements.
    With respect to the requirements for bills qualifying for 
fast track, it is the Committee's intent to extend authority to 
the President to negotiate agreements that would be subject to 
the special procedures similar to that given to past 
Administrations. At the same time, the Committee's intent is to 
tighten the process so as to avoid including non-trade 
provisions as well as provisions that may be trade-related but 
are extraneous to the trade agreement. The Committee has been 
concerned that a number of provisions that were not strictly 
trade-related and that were not related to implementing the 
trade agreement at hand have been included in past implementing 
bills.
    The Committee believes that for historical and 
constitutional reasons, it is important to make fast track as 
tailored as possible so as not to unnecessarily intrude on 
normal legislative procedures. Fast track is an exception to 
the rule that is permitted only because of the recognition of 
the compelling need to consider quickly and efficiently 
legislation to implement trade agreements. The President and 
the Congress both have important powers with respect to trade 
and foreign affairs issues. Therefore, trade agreements do not 
readily fit the legislative model used to consider other types 
of legislation. Fast track has been developed to assure that 
trade relations with other countries are handled expeditiously 
and efficiently with the involvement of the executive and 
legislative branches. In so doing, the Committee has always 
recognized that fast track should apply only to meet the 
special requirements of trade agreements. To apply fast track 
more broadly would usurp a broad range of Congressional 
authority and prerogatives to make laws in these areas. 
Accordingly, the general rule of H.R. 2621 would permit the 
extension of fast track procedures to bills consisting solely 
of the provisions set forth in section 103. The Committee 
further emphasizes that the eligibility requirements for fast 
track treatment set forth in section 103(b)(3) of H.R. 2621, as 
approved by the Committee, are similar to those of the 1988 Act 
but are more precise.
    In particular, the Committee intends that eligibility for 
fast track treatment under section 103(b)(3)(B) would cover 
only those provisions in the implementing bill that are 
directly related to the principal negotiating objectives set 
forth in section 102(b) and are necessary for the operation or 
implementation of the agreement. Section 103(b)(3)(C) covers 
those provisions that define and clarify, or provisions that 
are related to, the operation or effect of the provisions of 
the trade agreement. This language marks a change from prior 
versions of fast track, which covered provisions ``necessary or 
appropriate'' to implement the trade agreement. The Committee 
emphasizes that fast track, particularly section 103(b)(3)(C), 
should not apply to proposals to make wholesale changes to U.S. 
law merely because those laws may be addressed in the 
agreement. Provisions included in fast track should instead 
meet the tests set forth in the statutory language.
    With respect to section 103(b)(3)(D), which explicitly 
permits the inclusion within implementing bills qualifying for 
fast track procedures of provisions to provide adjustment 
assistance to workers and firms adversely affected by trade, 
the Committee expects that such trade adjustment assistance 
programs would be modeled on the NAFTA Transitional Adjustment 
Assistance Program (subchapter D of chapter 2 of Title II of 
the Trade Act of 1974, as amended). In addition, the Committee 
would consider whether any such future programs would include 
authority for the Secretary of Labor to waive the requirement 
of training, consistent with the recommendations of the General 
Accounting Office report required under section 280(a) of the 
Trade Act of 1974, as it would be amended by section 203 of 
this Act.

                     6. SECTION 104: CONSULTATIONS

Present/expired law

    Section 102 of the Trade Act of 1974 and sections 1102(d) 
and 1103 of the 1988 Act set forth the fast track requirements. 
These provisions required the President, before entering into 
any trade agreement, to consult with Congress as to the nature 
of the agreement, how and to what extent the agreement will 
achieve applicable purposes, policies, and objectives, and all 
matters relating to agreement implementation. In addition, 
before entering into an agreement, the President was required 
to give Congress at least 90 calendar days advance notice of 
his intent. The purpose of this period was to provide the 
Congressional Committees of jurisdiction an opportunity to 
review the proposed agreement before it was signed.
    Section 135(e) of the Trade Act of 1974 required that the 
Advisory Committee for Trade Policy and Negotiations meet at 
the conclusion of negotiations for each trade agreement and 
provide a report as to whether and to what extent the agreement 
promotes the economic interests of the United States and 
achieves the applicable overall and principal negotiating 
objectives of section 1101 of the 1988 Act. The report was due 
not later than the date on which the President notified 
Congress of his intent to enter into an agreement. With regard 
to the Uruguay Round, the report was due 30 days after the date 
of notification.

Explanation of provision

    Section 104 of H.R. 2621, as amended, would establish a 
number of requirements that the President consult with 
Congress. Specifically, section 104(a)(1) would require the 
President to provide written notice and consult with the 
relevant committees at least 90 calendar days prior to entering 
into negotiations. As with the expired procedures, fast track 
would not apply to an implementing bill if both Houses 
separately agree to a procedural disapproval resolution within 
any 60-day period stating that the Administration has failed to 
consult with Congress.
    Section 104(a)(2) would impose a special consultation 
requirement on the President, in addition to the requirements 
of section 104(a)(1), with respect to certain barriers to 
trade. Specifically, in the case of negotiations concerning the 
negotiating objective set forth in section 102(b)(1) (i.e., 
trade barriers directly related to trade) and in section 
102(b)(7) (i.e., labor, the environment, and other matters that 
are directly related to trade), the additional consultations 
would concern how the negotiation meets the objective of 
reducing or eliminating a tariff or non-tariff barrier or 
foreign government policy or practice directly related to 
trade. In these consultations, the President is toconsult with 
the House Committee on Ways and Means and the Committee on Finance of 
the Senate, as well as with the appropriate advisory groups established 
under section 135 of the Trade Act of 1974.
    Section 104(a)(3) would establish a special consultation 
requirement for agriculture. Specifically, before initiating 
negotiations concerning tariff reductions in agriculture, the 
President is to assess whether U.S. tariffs on agriculture 
products that were bound under the Uruguay Round Agreements are 
lower than the tariffs bound by that country. In his 
assessment, the President would also be required to consider 
whether the tariff levels bound and applied throughout the 
world with respect to imports from the United States are higher 
than U.S. tariffs and whether the negotiation provides an 
opportunity to address any such disparity. The President would 
be required to consult with the Committees on Ways and Means 
and Agriculture of the House and the Committee on Finance and 
Agriculture, Nutrition and Forestry of the Senate concerning 
the results of this assessment and whether it is appropriate 
for the United States to agree to further tariff reductions 
under such circumstances and how all applicable negotiating 
objectives would be met.
    In addition, section 104(b) would require the President, 
before entering into any trade agreement, to consult with the 
relevant Committees concerning the nature of the agreement, how 
and to what extent the agreement will achieve the applicable 
purposes, policies, and objectives set forth in H.R. 2621 and 
all matters relating to implementation under section 105, 
including the general effect of the agreement on U.S. laws.
    Finally, section 104(c) would require that the report of 
the Advisory Committee for Trade Policy and Negotiations under 
section 135(e)(1) of the Trade Act of 1974 be provided not 
later than 30 days after the date on which the President 
notifies Congress of his intent to enter into the agreement 
under section 105(a)(1)(A).

Reason for change

    The Committee believes that the consultation requirements 
of the expired fast track authority have been effective in 
allowing Congress to participate in the policy decisions 
surrounding the negotiation of trade agreements. Accordingly, 
H.R. 2621, as amended, would continue these provisions in 
similar form. However, because certain negotiating objectives, 
specifically under subsections 102(b)(1) and 102(b)(7), are new 
or untested, the Committee intends that the President 
demonstrate that a particular negotiation is meant to remove 
barriers directly related to trade. In addition, because of the 
special requirements of agriculture tariff negotiations, in 
which there is a great tariff disparity between the U.S. duty 
rate and the rate bound or applied by other countries, 
additional consultation requirements would apply.
    H.R. 2621, as amended, would treat all trade agreements 
concluded under section 103(b) in the same manner for 
consultation purposes and does not differentiate between 
bilateral and multilateral agreements. Accordingly, the bill 
would extend to all such negotiations, and not just to 
bilateral negotiations as in the 1988 Act, the requirement that 
the President provide prior written notice of negotiations.
    The Committee emphasizes the importance of timely, 
complete, and rigorous consultations between the Administration 
and Congress. The improvements made with respect to 
consultations, as compared with the expired provisions, are 
designed to assure maximum Congressional participation before, 
during, and after the trade negotiating process. The Committee 
notes that in the past, consultations have been at times less 
than ideal and wishes to improve this process considerably to 
make it more meaningful. Given the significant Congressional 
role in trade policy set forth in the Constitution, it is 
imperative that Members and their staffs be given periodic and 
timely substantive briefings by U.S. negotiators and access to 
relevant documents and information sources. The Committee 
emphasizes that Congress must be fully involved in all phases 
of the negotiating process and must have the ability to fully 
express its views and exert its constitutional role. The 
Committee intends that throughout the process, the 
consultations address the nature of the agreement in question, 
how and to what extent the agreement will achieve the 
applicable purposes, policies, and objectives set forth in H.R. 
2621 and all matters relating to implementation under section 
105, including the general effect of the agreement on U.S. 
laws.
    Finally, H.R. 2621, as amended, would permit the Advisory 
Committee for Trade Policy and Negotiations to submit its 
report after the President notifies his intent to enter into an 
agreement, as opposed to requiring the report be filed on the 
same day as that notification. The Committee believes that the 
additional time would contribute to the usefulness of the 
report.

           7. SECTION 105: IMPLEMENTATION OF TRADE AGREEMENTS

Present/expired law

    Before entering into the draft agreement, the President was 
required to give Congress 90 days advance notice (120 days for 
the Uruguay Round) to provide an opportunity for revision 
before signature. After entering into the agreement, the 
President was required to submit formally the draft agreement, 
implementing legislation, and a statement of administrative 
action. Once the bill was formally introduced, there was no 
opportunity to amend any portion of the bill--whether on the 
floor or in committee. Consequently, before the formal 
introduction took place, the committees of jurisdiction would 
hold hearings, ``mock mark-up'' sessions and a ``mock 
conference'' with the Senate committees of jurisdiction in 
order to develop a draft implementing bill together with the 
Administration and to make their concerns known to the 
Administration before it introduced the legislation formally.
    After formal introduction of the implementing bill, the 
House committees of jurisdiction had 45 legislative days to 
report the bill, and the House was required to vote on the bill 
within 15 legislative days after the measure was reported or 
discharged from the committees. Fifteen additional days were 
provided for Senate committee consideration (assuming the 
implementing bill was a revenue bill), and the Senate floor 
action was required within 15 additional days. Accordingly, the 
maximum period for Congressional consideration of an 
implementing bill from the date of introduction was 90 
legislative days. Amendments to the legislation were not 
permitted once the bill was introduced; the committee and floor 
actions consisted of ``up or down'' votes on the bill as 
introduced.
    Finally, section 1103(d) of the 1988 Act specified that the 
fast track rules were enacted as an exercise of the rulemaking 
power of the House and the Senate, with the recognition of the 
right of either House to change the rules at any time.

Explanation of provision

    Under section 105(a) of H.R. 2621, as amended, the 
President would be required, at least 90 days before entering 
into an agreement, to notify Congress of his intent to enter 
into the agreement. Section 105(a) also would establish a new 
requirement that the President, within 60 days of signing an 
agreement, submit to Congress a preliminary list of existing 
laws that he considers would be required to bring the United 
States into compliance with agreement.
    Section 105(b) would provide that fast track would not 
apply if both Houses separately agree to a procedural 
disapproval resolution within any 60-day period stating that 
the Administration failed to consult with Congress.
    Most of the remaining provisions are identical to the 
expired law. Specifically, section 105(a) would require the 
President, after entering into agreement, to submitformally the 
draft agreement, the implementing legislation, and a statement of 
administrative action to Congress, and there would be no time limit to 
do so. The procedures of section 151 of the Trade Act of 1974 would 
then apply. Specifically, on the same day as the President formally 
submits the legislation, the bill would be introduced (by request) by 
the Majority Leaders of the House and the Senate. After formal 
introduction of the legislation, the House Committees of jurisdiction 
would have 45 legislative days to report the bill. The House would be 
required to vote on the bill within 15 legislative days after the 
measure was reported or discharged from the Committees. Fifteen 
additional days would be provided for Senate Committee consideration 
(assuming the implementing bill was a revenue bill), and Senate floor 
action would be required within 15 additional days. Accordingly, the 
maximum period for Congressional consideration of the implementing bill 
from the date of introduction would be 90 legislative days.
    As with the expired provisions, once the bill has been 
formally introduced, no amendments would be permitted either in 
Committee or floor action, and a straight ``up or down'' vote 
would be required. Of course, before formal introduction, the 
bill could be developed by the Committees of jurisdiction 
together with the Administration during the informal Committee 
``mock mark-up'' process.
    Finally, as with the expired provision, section 105(c) 
specifies that sections 105(b) and 103(c) are enacted as an 
exercise of the rulemaking power of the House and the Senate, 
with the recognition of the right of either House to change the 
rules at any time.

Reason for change

    The procedures established under H.R. 2621 are mainly 
identical to those of the 1988 Act. The Committee views these 
procedures as having been effective in the past because they 
permit Congress to participate in the drafting of the 
implementing bill.
    As with the past provision, there would be no deadline for 
the submission of the legislation by the President once an 
agreement has been concluded, because the Committee intends 
that the Committees and the Administration have as much time as 
necessary to consider the content of the legislation. After the 
formal introduction, certain deadlines are appropriate because 
Congress has already conducted its process informally. The 
Committee believes that the informal ``mock mark-up'' process 
conducted before formal submission of the implementing bill 
provides the Congress, the public, and the private sector ample 
opportunity to participate in the development of the proposed 
legislation and to provide their views to the Administration. 
The Committee encourages and expects the Administration to 
continue its practice of considering carefully the comments 
made during this informal process and of making no changes to 
the legislation beyond those recommended by the Committees. If 
the Administration must make changes to reconcile differing 
recommendations by the relevant Committees, the Committee 
expects that the Administration will continue to consult with 
the affected Committees.
    H.R. 2621, as amended, would add a new procedural step 
requiring that the President submit to Congress, within 60 days 
of signing an agreement, a preliminary list of existing laws 
that he considers would be required to bring the United States 
into compliance with the agreement. This requirement has been 
added out of concern that in the past, Congress has not always 
been timely apprised of the changes to U.S. law that the 
Administration believes are required. This information is of 
vital importance to the Committee in its deliberations.

         8. SECTION 106: TREATMENT OF CERTAIN TRADE AGREEMENTS

Present/expired law

    No provision.

Explanation of provision

    Section 106 exempts an agreement with Chile, the 
Information Technology Agreement, and WTO work programs 
(concerning rules of origin and financial services) from 
prenegotiation consultation requirements of section 104(a) 
only. However, upon enactment of H.R. 2621, the Administration 
is required to consult as to those elements set forth in 
section 104(a) as soon as feasible.

Reason for change

    The Committee recognizes the importance of the listed 
negotiations to the United States and the need to implement 
them under fast track. However, because these negotiations have 
already begun, it would not be possible for the Administration 
to comply with the prenegotiation consultation requirements set 
forth in section 104(a). Accordingly, the Committee believes 
these requirements should be waived with regard to these 
agreements only. However, the Committee expects that the 
Administration will consult with Congress as soon as feasible 
after enactment of this Act and will continue to consult 
closely with the Committees throughout the negotiations so that 
the Committees may be informed about the issues and communicate 
any concerns.

             9. SECTION 107: CHIEF AGRICULTURAL NEGOTIATOR

Present/expired law

    No provision.

Explanation of provision

    Section 107 of H.R. 2621, as amended, establishes the 
permanent position within USTR of Chief Agriculture Negotiator, 
whose functions include the conduct of trade negotiations 
relating to agricultural commodities and other functions as the 
USTR may direct.

Reason for change

    The Committee understands that USTR has created a temporary 
position for Chief Agricultural Negotiator, to be filled 
through the agriculture negotiations beginning in 1999 under 
the auspices of the WTO. However, the Committee believes that 
this position, and negotiation and enforcement of agriculture 
agreements, is sufficiently important to justify a permanent 
position.

                B. Title II--Trade Adjustment Assistance

           1. SECTION 201: ADJUSTMENT ASSISTANCE FOR WORKERS

Present law

    Section 245 of the Trade Act of 1974, as amended (19 U.S.C. 
2317), authorizes appropriations to the Department of Labor 
through fiscal year 1998 of such sums as may be necessary to 
administer the general TAA and NAFTA-related TAA programs of 
Chapter 2 of Title II that Act.

Explanation of provision

    The provision would amend section 245 of the Trade Act of 
1974, as amended (19 U.S.C. 2317), to authorize appropriations 
to the Department of Labor through fiscal year 2000 of such 
sums as may be necessary to administer the general TAA and 
NAFTA-related TAA programs of Chapter 2 of Title II of that 
Act.

Reason for change

    The provision reflects the Committee's belief that 
appropriations for the general TAA and NAFTA-TAA programs 
should be reauthorized through fiscal year 2000.

Effective date

     The provision would take effect on the date of enactment.

            2. SECTION 202: ADJUSTMENT ASSISTANCE FOR FIRMS

Present law

    Section 256(b) of the Trade Act of 1974, as amended (19 
U.S.C. 2346(b)) authorizes appropriations to the Secretary of 
Commerce through fiscal year 1998 of such sums as may be 
necessary to administer the TAA for firms program (Chapter 3 of 
Title II of the Trade Act of 1974, as amended).

Explanation of provision

    Section 201 would amend section 256(b) of the Trade Act of 
1974, as amended (19 U.S.C. 2346(b)), to authorize 
appropriations to the Secretary of Commerce through fiscal year 
2000 of such sums as may be necessary to administer the TAA for 
firms program.

Reason for change

    The provision reflects the Committee's belief that 
authorizations of appropriations for the TAA for firms program 
should be extended through fiscal year 2000.

Effective date

    The provision would take effect on the date of enactment.

            3. SECTION 203: GENERAL ACCOUNTING OFFICE REPORT

Present law

    Section 280(a) of the Trade Act of 1974, as amended (19 
U.S.C. 2391(a)), required the General Accounting Office (GAO) 
to conduct a study of the general TAA program, the NAFTA-
related TAA program, and Adjustment Assistance for Communities 
(Chapter 4 of Title II of the Tariff Act of 1974, as amended, 
which terminated on September 30, 1982) and report the results 
to the Congress no later than January 31, 1980.

Explanation of provision

    Section 203 would amend section 280(a) of the Trade Act of 
1974, as amended (19 U.S.C. 2391(a)), to require the GAO to 
conduct a study of the general TAA and the NAFTA-related TAA 
programs and report the results to the Congress no later than 
October 1, 1999.

Reason for change

    The Committee believes that a GAO report one year prior to 
termination of the general TAA and NAFTA-related TAA programs 
on September 30, 2000 would allow the Committee an opportunity 
for timely and effective oversight for consideration of 
possible extensions of the programs. With regard to the 
discussion above concerning the qualification for fast track 
procedures, under section 103(b)(3)(D) of this bill for any 
trade adjustment assistance programs, the Committee intends 
that the GAO report will provide recommendations as to whether 
any such future TAA programs should include authority for the 
Secretary of Labor to waive the requirement of training.

Effective date

    The provision would take effect on the date of enactment.

                      4. SECTION 204: TERMINATION

Present law

    Section 285(c) of the Trade Act of 1974, as amended (19 
U.S.C. 2271 note), provides that no assistance, vouchers, 
allowances, or other payments may be provided under the general 
TAA or NAFTA-related TAA programs, and no technical assistance 
may be provided under the TAA for firms program after September 
30, 1998.

Explanation of provision

    Section 204 would amend section 285(c) of the Trade Act of 
1974, as amended (19 U.S.C. 2271 note), to provide that no 
assistance, vouchers, allowances, or other payments may be 
provided under the general TAA or NAFTA-related TAA programs, 
and no technical assistance may be provided under the TAA for 
firms program after September 30, 2000.

Reason for change

    The provision reflects the Committee's belief that the 
termination date for the general TAA, NAFTA-related TAA, and 
TAA for firms programs should be extended until September 30, 
2000.

Effective date

    The provision would take effect on the date of enactment.

                    C. Title III--Revenue Provisions

Present law

    Gross income for purposes of the Internal Revenue Code 
generally includes all income from whatever source derived, 
including rents. The Code (sec. 280A(g)) provides an exception 
to this rule where a dwelling unit is used during the taxable 
year by the taxpayer as a residence and such dwelling unit is 
actually rented for less than 15 days during the taxable year. 
In this case, the income from such rental is not included in 
gross income and no deductions arising from such rental use are 
allowed as a deduction.

Explanation of provision

    The bill repeals the 15-day rules of section 280A(g). The 
bill also provides that no reduction in basis is required if 
the taxpayer: (1) rented the dwelling unit for less than 15 
days during the taxable year and (2) did not claim depreciation 
on the dwelling unit for the period of rental.

Reason for change

    The present-law exception allows certain taxpayers to 
exclude from income large rental payments for the short-term 
rental of the taxpayer's residence. The Committee believes that 
such amounts generally should be included in income of the 
taxpayers.

Effective date

    The provision applies to taxable years beginning after 
December 31, 1997.

            III. VOTE OF THE COMMITTEE IN REPORTING THE BILL

    In compliance with clause 2(l)(2)(B) of rule XI of the 
Rules of the House of Representatives, the following statements 
are made concerning the votes of the Committee on Ways and 
Means in its consideration of the bill H.R. 2621.

                       Motion to Report the Bill

    The bill, H.R. 2621, as amended, was ordered favorably 
reported by a roll call vote of 24 yeas to 14 nays (with a 
quorum being present). The vote was as follows:

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
         Representatives             Yea       Nay     Present    Representatives      Yea       Nay     Present
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mr. Archer......................        X   ........  ........  Mr. Rangel........  ........        X   ........
Mr. Crane.......................        X   ........  ........  Mr. Stark.........  ........        X   ........
Mr. Thomas......................        X   ........  ........  Mr. Matsui........        X   ........  ........
Mr. Shaw........................        X   ........  ........  Mrs. Kennelly.....        X   ........  ........
Mrs. Johnson....................        X   ........  ........  Mr. Coyne.........  ........        X   ........
Mr. Bunning.....................        X   ........  ........  Mr. Levin.........  ........        X   ........
Mr. Houghton....................        X   ........  ........  Mr. Cardin........  ........        X   ........
Mr. Herger......................        X   ........  ........  Mr. McDermott.....        X   ........  ........
Mr. McCrery.....................        X   ........  ........  Mr. Kleczka.......  ........        X   ........
Mr. Camp........................        X   ........  ........  Mr. Lewis.........  ........        X   ........
Mr. Ramstad.....................        X   ........  ........  Mr. Neal..........  ........        X   ........
Mr. Nussle......................        X   ........  ........  Mr. McNulty.......  ........        X   ........
Mr. Johnson.....................        X   ........  ........  Mr. Jefferson.....        X   ........  ........
Ms. Dunn........................        X   ........  ........  Mr. Tanner........        X   ........  ........
Mr. Collins.....................        X   ........  ........  Mr. Becerra.......  ........        X   ........
Mr. Portman.....................        X   ........  ........  Mrs. Thurman......  ........        X   ........
Mr. English.....................  ........        X   ........                                                  
Mr. Ensign......................  ........  ........  ........                                                  
Mr. Christensen.................        X   ........  ........                                                  
Mr. Watkins.....................        X   ........  ........                                                  
Mr. Hayworth....................        X   ........  ........                                                  
Mr. Weller......................  ........        X   ........                                                  
Mr. Hulshof.....................        X   ........  ........                                                  
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                     IV. BUDGET EFFECTS OF THE BILL

               A. Committee Estimates of Budgetary Effect

    Pursuant to clause 2(l)(3)(C) of rule XI of the Rules of 
the House of Representatives, the Committee agrees with cost 
estimates furnished by the Congressional Budget Office on H.R. 
2621, as amended, set forth below.

                B. Budget Authority and Tax Expenditures

    In compliance with clause 2(l)(3)(B) of rule XI of the 
Rules of the House of Representatives, the Committee states 
that the bill reduces tax expenditures by the amount of the 
revenue offset provision to repeal Internal Revenue Code 
section 280A(g), and provides new budget authority as a result 
of the extension of Trade Adjustment Assistance.

      C. Cost Estimate Prepared by the Congressional Budget Office

                                     U.S. Congress,
                               Congressional Budget Office,
                                  Washington, DC, October 21, 1997.
Hon. Bill Archer,
Chairman, Committee on Ways and Means,
House of Representatives, Washington, DC.
    Dear Mr. Chairman: The Congressional Budget Office has 
prepared the enclosed cost estimate for H.R. 2621, the 
Reciprocal Trade Agreement Authorities Act of 1997.
    If you wish further details on this estimate, we will be 
pleased to provide them. The CBO staff contacts are Alyssa 
Trzeszkowski (for revenues); Christi H. Sadoti (for Trade 
Adjustment Assistance for Workers); and Gary Brown (for Trade 
Adjustment Assistance for Firms).
            Sincerely,
                                         June E. O'Neill, Director.
    Enclosure.

H.R. 2621--Reciprocal Trade Agreement Authorities Act of 1977

    Summary: H.R. 2621, the Reciprocal Trade Agreement 
Authorities Act of 1997, would restore the President's 
authority to enter into multilateral and bilateral trade 
agreements with Congressional approval or rejection of, but not 
amendment to, those agreements. In addition, H.R. 2621 would 
extend the Trade Adjustment Assistance (TAA) programs for both 
workers and firms, which will expire on September 30, 1998. CBO 
estimates this extension would result in direct spending of 
$750 million over the 1992-2002 period and discretionary 
spending of $12 million over the same period, subject to the 
appropriation of the estimated amounts. For Congressional 
scoring and pay-as-you-go purposes, only $101 million in direct 
spending would be counted because the remainder is already 
included in the budget resolution baseline, as required by law. 
The bill would also repeal a special rule within the Internal 
Revenue Code pertaining to the rental usage of vacation homes. 
The Joint Committee on Taxation (JCT) estimates that enacting 
this provision would increase revenues by $23 million in 1998 
and by $123 million over the 1998-2002 period. Because enacting 
the bill would affect revenues and direct spending, pay-as-you-
go procedures would apply.
    The bill contains one new private-sector mandate, but does 
not contain any intergovernmental mandates as defined in the 
Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA), and would not 
impose any costs on state, local, or tribal governments.
    Estimated cost to the Federal Government: The estimated 
budgetary impact of H.R. 2621 is shown in the following table.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                      By fiscal years, in millions of dollars--                 
                                    ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                      1997   1998   1999   2000   2001   2002   2003   2004   2005   2006   2007
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                               CHANGES IN REVENUES                                              
                                                                                                                
Restoration of Fast Track Authority      0      0      0      0      0      0      0      0      0      0      0
Repeal of Special Rule for Vacation                                                                             
 Homes.............................      0     23     23     24     26     27     28     29     30     31     33
                                                                                                                
                                                 DIRECT SPENDING                                                
Baseline Spending Under Current Law                                                                             
 for TAA for Workers:                                                                                           
    Estimated Budget Authority.....    311    340    315    331    332    333    333    334    334    334    337
    Estimated Outlays..............    300    343    328    335    332    333    333    334    334    334    337
Proposed Changes:                                                                                               
    Estimated Budget Authority.....      0      0     50     51      0      0      0      0      0      0      0
    Estimated Outlays..............      0      0     39     48     12      3      0      0      0      0      0
Baseline Spending Under H.R. 2621                                                                               
 for TAA for Workers:                                                                                           
    Estimated Budget Authority.....    311    340    365    383    332    333    333    334    334    334    337
    Estimated Outlays..............    300    343    367    383    344    336    333    334    334    334    337
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                  By fiscal years, in millions of dollars--     
                                                           -----------------------------------------------------
                                                              1997     1998     1999     2000     2001     2002 
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                        SPENDING SUBJECT TO APPROPRIATION                                       
                                                                                                                
Spending Under Current Law for TAA for Firms:                                                                   
    Estimated Authorization Level \1\.....................        9       10        0        0        0        0
    Estimated Outlays.....................................       10        9        9        6        5        2
Proposed Changes:                                                                                               
    Estimated Authorization Level.........................        0        0       10       10        0        0
    Estimated Outlays.....................................        0        0        0        3        4        5
Spending Under H.R. 2621 for TAA for Firms:                                                                     
    Estimated Authorization Level \1\.....................        9       10       10       10        0        0
    Estimated Outlays.....................................       10        9        9        9        9        7
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ The 1997 level is the amount actually appropriated. The 1998 level is the amount in H.R. 2267, the House-   
  passed version of the bill making appropriations for the Departments of Commerce, Justice, and State, the     
  Judiciary, and related agencies for the fiscal year ending September 30, 1998, and for other purposes.        

Basis of estimate

            Revenues
    Before their expiration on June 1, 1993, sections 1102 and 
1103 of the Omnibus Trade and Competitiveness Act of 1988 
granted the President the authority to enter into multilateral 
and bilateral trade agreements. The President could reduce 
certain tariffs by proclamation within specified bounds 
prescribed by the law. For provisions subject to Congressional 
approval, the Congress could not amend implementing legislation 
once it was introduced. Furthermore, as long as the President 
met statutory requirements concerning Congressional 
consultation during the negotiation process, the Congress was 
required to act on the legislation following a strict 
timetable. This consideration process was known as the ``fast 
track'' procedure. Public Law 103-40 temporarily extended these 
provisions through April 16, 1994, for any trade agreement 
resulting from the Uruguay round negotiations taking place 
under the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade.
    The Reciprocal Trade Agreement Authorities Act of 1997 
would restore the President's authority to implement certain 
tariff changes. This provision of H.R. 2621 would have no 
direct effect on revenues, because future trade agreements 
would require implementing legislation. The effect of any 
changes implemented by the President would be attributed to the 
legislation implementing the agreement.
    The bill would also repeal a special rule within the 
Internal Revenue Code pertaining to the rental usage of 
vacation homes. The Joint Committee on Taxation (JCT) estimates 
that enacting this provision would increase revenues by $23 
million in 1998 and by $123 million over the 1998-2002 period.
            Direct spending
    The Trade Adjustment Assistance program, which was 
established by the Trade Expansion Act of 1962, and was most 
recently extended until September 30, 1998, by the Omnibus 
Reconciliation Act of 1993, provides transitional adjustment 
assistance for workers and firms dislocated as a result of 
increased imports. The bill would extend Trade Adjustment 
Assistance for Workers through fiscal year 2000 at an estimated 
cost of $750 million over the 1999-2002 period. For 
Congressional scoring and pay-as-you-go purposes, however, only 
the cost of assistance resulting from the North American Free 
Trade Agreement (NAFTA) Implementation Act would count as 
additional spending, because the other costs of extending TAA 
for workers, averaging about $325 million annually in 1999 and 
2000, are included in the budget resolution baseline, as 
required by the Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit Control 
Act of 1985.
    CBO estimates that extending the NAFTA TAA program for two 
years would result in additional outlays of $101 million over 
the 1999-2002 period. For purposes of this estimate, CBO 
assumes that the number of workers receiving benefits would 
continue to be about 5,000 each year. We estimate that cash 
assistance benefits would average $220 per beneficiary per week 
for an average of 30 weeks, and that training benefits would 
cost about $3,500 per beneficiary.

Spending subject to appropriation

    CBO estimates that the authorization of such sums as 
necessary for Trade Adjustment Assistance for Firms in each of 
fiscal years 1998 through 2000 would result in new spending 
subject to appropriation of about $12 million over the 1999-
2002 period. This estimate assumes that the amount appropriated 
each year under this authorization would be about $9.5 million, 
the amount provided for 1998 in H.R. 2267, the House-passed 
version of the bill making appropriations for the Departments 
of Commerce, Justice, and State, the Judiciary, and related 
agencies for the fiscal year ending September 30, 1998. (An 
identical amount is designated in the Senate-passed version of 
this year's appropriation bill.) Outlays are estimated based on 
historical spending rates for the Economic Development 
Administration.
    Pay-as-you-go considerations: Section 252 of the Balanced 
Budget and Emergency Deficit Control Act of 1985 sets up pay-
as-you-go procedures for legislation affecting direct spending 
or receipts. The projected changes in direct spending and 
revenues through 2007 are shown in the following table. For 
purposes of enforcing pay-as-you-go procedures, however, only 
the effects in the budget year and the succeeding four years 
are counted.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                     By fiscal years, in millions of dollars--                  
                                 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                   1998    1999    2000    2001    2002    2003    2004    2005    2006    2007 
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Change in Outlays...............       0      39      48      12       3       0       0       0       0       0
Change in Receipts..............      23      23      24      26      27      28      29      30      31      33
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


    Intergovernmental and private-sector impact: The Joint 
Committee on Taxation has determined that H.R. 2621 contains 
one new private-sector mandate, as defined in UMRA. The 
provision relating to the repeal of the 14-day rule on rental 
of vacation properties (Internal Revenue Code, section 280A(g)) 
is estimated to increase tax revenue by $123 million over 
fiscal years 1998 through 2002, which is the estimated amount 
that the private sector would be required to spend in order to 
comply with this federal private-sector mandate. The bill would 
not impose an intergovernmental mandate on state, local, or 
tribal governments, as such governmental entities are generally 
exempt from federal income tax.
    Estimate prepared by: Revenues: Alyssa Trzeszkowski; 
Federal Costs: Christi H. Sadoti, and Gary Brown.
    Estimate approved by: Rosemary Marcuss, Assistant Director 
for Tax Analysis, and Robert A. Sunshine, Deputy Assistant 
Director for Budget Analysis.

     V. OTHER MATTERS TO BE DISCUSSED UNDER THE RULES OF THE HOUSE

          A. Committee Oversight Findings and Recommendations

    With respect to subdivision (A) of clause 2(l)(3) of rule 
XI of the Rules of the House of Representatives (relating to 
oversight findings), the Committee advises that it was as a 
result of the Committee's oversight activities concerning 
customs and tariff matters, import trade matters, and specific 
trade-related issues that the Committee concluded that it was 
appropriate to enact the provisions contained in the bill.

    B. Summary of Findings and Recommendations of the Committee on 
                    Government Reform and Oversight

    With respect to subdivision (D) of clause 2(l)(4) of rule 
XI of the Rules of the House of Representatives (relating to 
oversight findings), the Committee advises that no oversight 
findings or recommendations have been submitted to this 
Committee by the Committee on Government Reform and Oversight 
with respect to the provisions contained in this bill.

                 C. Constitutional Authority Statement

    With respect to clause 2(l)(4) of rule XI of the Rules of 
the House of Representatives, relating to Constitutional 
Authority, the Committee states that the Committee's action in 
reporting the bill is derived from Article 1 of the 
Constitution, Section 8 (``The Congress shall have power to lay 
and collect taxes, duties, imposts and excises, to pay the 
debts and to provide for * * * the general Welfare of the 
United States * * *).

              D. Information Relating to Unfunded Mandates

    This information is provided in accordance with section 423 
of the Unfunded Mandates Act of 1995 (P.L. 104-4).
    The Committee has determined that the provision of the bill 
relating to the repeal of the 14-day rule on rental of vacation 
property will impose a Federal mandate on the private sector in 
the amount shown in the CBO estimate, above. This revenue is 
needed to offset the budget cost of the Trade Adjustment 
Assistance provision. This provision of the bill will not 
impose a Federal intergovernmental mandate on State, local, or 
tribal governments.

       VI. CHANGES IN EXISTING LAW MADE BY THE BILL, AS REPORTED

  In compliance with clause 3 of rule XIII of the Rules of the 
House of Representatives, changes in existing law made by the 
bill, as reported, are shown as follows (existing law proposed 
to be omitted is enclosed in black brackets, new matter is 
printed in italic, existing law in which no change is proposed 
is shown in roman):

                           TRADE ACT OF 1974

          * * * * * * *

                TITLE I--NEGOTIATING AND OTHER AUTHORITY

          * * * * * * *

         CHAPTER 3--HEARINGS AND ADVICE CONCERNING NEGOTIATIONS

SEC. 131. ADVICE FROM INTERNATIONAL TRADE COMMISSION.

  (a) Lists of Articles Which May Be Considered for Action.--
          (1) In connection with any proposed trade agreement 
        under [section 123 of this Act or section 1102 (a) or 
        (c) of the Omnibus Trade and Competitiveness Act of 
        1988,] section 123 of this Act or section 103(a) or (b) 
        of the Reciprocal Trade Agreement Authorities Act of 
        1997, the President shall from time to time publish and 
        furnish the International Trade Commission (hereafter 
        in this section referred to as the ``Commission'') with 
        lists of articles which may be considered for 
        modification or continuance of United States duties, 
        continuance of United States duty-free or excise 
        treatment, or additional duties. In the case of any 
        article with respect to which consideration may be 
        given to reducing or increasing the rate of duty, the 
        list shall specify the provision of this subchapter 
        under which such consideration may be given.
          (2) In connection with any proposed trade agreement 
        under [section 1102 (b) or (c) of the Omnibus Trade and 
        Competitiveness Act of 1988] section 103(b) of the 
        Reciprocal Trade Agreement Authorities Act of 1997, the 
        President may from time to time publish and furnish the 
        Commission with lists of nontariff matters which may be 
        considered for modification.
  (b) Advice to President by Commission.--Within 6 months after 
receipt of a list under subsection (a) or, in the case of a 
list submitted in connection with a trade agreement, within 90 
days after receipt of such list, the Commission shall advise 
the President, with respect to each article or nontariff 
matter, of its judgment as to the probable economic effect of 
modification of the tariff or nontariff measure on industries 
producing like or directly competitive articles and on 
consumers, so as to assist the President in making an informed 
judgment as to the impact which might be caused by such 
modifications on United States interests, such as sectors 
involved in manufacturing, agriculture, mining, fishing, 
services, intellectual property, investment, labor, and 
consumers. Such advice may include in the case of any article 
the advice of the Commission as to whether any reduction in the 
rate of duty should take place over a longer period of time 
than the minimum period provided for in section [1102(a)(3)(A)] 
section 103(a)(3)(A) of the Reciprocal Trade Agreement 
Authorities Act of 1997.
  (c) Additional Investigations and Reports Requested by the 
President or the Trade Representative.--In addition, in order 
to assist the President in his determination whether to enter 
into any agreement under section 123 of this Act or [section 
1102 of the Omnibus Trade and Competitiveness Act of 1988,] 
section 103 of the Reciprocal Trade Agreement Authorities Act 
of 1997, or how to develop trade policy, priorities or other 
matters (such as priorities for actions to improve 
opportunities in foreign markets), the Commission shall make 
such investigations and reports as may be requested by the 
President or the United States Trade Representative on matters 
such as effects of modification of any barrier to (or other 
distortion of) international trade on domestic workers, 
industries or sectors, purchasers, prices and quantities of 
articles in the United States.
          * * * * * * *

SEC. 132. ADVICE FROM EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENTS AND OTHER SOURCES.

  Before any trade agreement is entered into under section 123 
of this Act or [section 1102 of the Omnibus Trade and 
Competitiveness Act of 1988,] section 103 of the Reciprocal 
Trade Agreement Authorities Act of 1997, the President shall 
seek information and advice with respect to such agreement from 
the Departments of Agriculture, Commerce, Defense, Interior, 
Labor, State and the Treasury, from the United States Trade 
Representative, and from such other sources as he may deem 
appropriate. Such advice shall be prepared and presented 
consistent with the provisions of Reorganization Plan Number 3 
of 1979, Executive Order Number 12188 and section 141(c).

SEC. 133. PUBLIC HEARINGS.

  (a) Opportunity for Presentation of Views.--In connection 
with any proposed trade agreement under section 123 of this Act 
or [section 1102 of the Omnibus Trade and Competitiveness Act 
of 1988,] section 103 of the Reciprocal Trade Agreement 
Authorities Act of 1997, the President shall afford an 
opportunity for any interested person to present his views 
concerning any article on a list published under section 131, 
any matter or article which should be so listed, any concession 
which should be sought by the United States, or any other 
matter relevant to such proposed trade agreement. For this 
purpose, the President shall designate an agency or an 
interagency committee which shall, after reasonable notice, 
hold public hearings and prescribe regulations governing the 
conduct ofsuch hearings. When appropriate, such procedures 
shall apply to the development of trade policy and priorities.
          * * * * * * *

SEC. 134. PREREQUISITES FOR OFFERS.

  (a) In any negotiation seeking an agreement under section 123 
of this Act or [section 1102 of the Omnibus Trade and 
Competitiveness Act of 1988,] section 103 of the Reciprocal 
Trade Agreement Authorities Act of 1997, the President may make 
a formal offer for the modification or continuance of any 
United States duty, import restrictions, or barriers to (or 
other distortions of) international trade, the continuance of 
United States duty-free or excise treatment, or the imposition 
of additional duties, import restrictions, or other barrier to 
(or other distortion of) international trade including trade in 
services, foreign direct investment and intellectual property 
as covered by this title, with respect to any article or matter 
only after he has received a summary of the hearings at which 
an opportunity to be heard with respect to such article has 
been afforded under section 133. In addition, the President may 
make an offer for the modification or continuance of any United 
States duty, the continuance of United States duty-free or 
excise treatment, or the imposition of additional duties, with 
respect to any article included in a list published and 
furnished under section 131(a), only after he has received 
advice concerning such article from the Commission under 
section 131(b), or after the expiration of the 6-month or 90-
day period provided for in that section, as appropriate, 
whichever first occurs.
  (b) In determining whether to make offers described in 
subsection (a) in the course of negotiating any trade agreement 
under [section 1102 of the Omnibus Trade and Competitiveness 
Act of 1988] section 103 of the Reciprocal Trade Agreement 
Authorities Act of 1997, and in determining the nature and 
scope of such offers, the President shall take into account any 
advice or information provided, or reports submitted, by--
          (1) * * *
          * * * * * * *

SEC. 135. INFORMATION AND ADVICE FROM PRIVATE AND PUBLIC SECTORS.

  (a) In General.--
          (1) The President shall seek information and advice 
        from representative elements of the private sector and 
        the non-Federal governmental sector with respect to--
                  (A) negotiating objectives and bargaining 
                positions before entering into a trade 
                agreement under this title or [section 1102 of 
                the Omnibus Trade and Competitiveness Act of 
                1988] section 103 of the Reciprocal Trade 
                Agreement Authorities Act of 1997;
          * * * * * * *
  (e) Meeting of Advisory Committees at Conclusion of 
Negotiations.--
          (1) The Advisory Committee for Trade Policy and 
        Negotiations, each appropriate policy advisory 
        committee, and each sectoral or functional advisory 
        committee, if the sector or area which such committee 
        represents is affected, shall meet at the conclusion of 
        negotiations for each trade agreement entered into 
        under [section 1102 of the Omnibus Trade and 
        Competitiveness Act of 1988] section 103 of the 
        Reciprocal Trade Agreement Authorities Act of 1997, to 
        provide to the President, to Congress, and to the 
        United States Trade Representative a report on such 
        agreement. Each report that applies to a trade 
        agreement entered into under [section 1102 of the 
        Omnibus Trade and Competitiveness Act of 1988] section 
        103 of the Reciprocal Trade Agreement Authorities Act 
        of 1997 shall be provided under the preceding sentence 
        not later than the date on which the President notifies 
        the Congress under section [1103(a)(1)(A) of such Act 
        of 1988] section 105(a)(1)(A) of the Reciprocal Trade 
        Agreement Authorities Act of 1997 of his intention to 
        enter into that agreement.
          (2) The report of the Advisory Committee for Trade 
        Policy and Negotiations and each appropriate policy 
        advisory committee shall include an advisory opinion as 
        to whether and to what extent the agreement promotes 
        the economic interests of the United States and 
        achieves the applicable overall and principal 
        negotiating objectives set forth in [section 1101 of 
        the Omnibus Trade and Competitiveness Act of 1988] 
        section 102 of the Reciprocal Trade Agreement 
        Authorities Act of 1997, as appropriate.
          * * * * * * *

   CHAPTER 5--CONGRESSIONAL PROCEDURES WITH RESPECT TO PRESIDENTIAL 
                                ACTIONS

SEC. 151. BILLS IMPLEMENTING TRADE AGREEMENTS ON NONTARIFF BARRIERS AND 
                    RESOLUTIONS APPROVING COMMERCIAL AGREEMENTS WITH 
                    COMMUNIST COUNTRIES.

  (a) * * *
  (b) Definitions.--For purposes of this section--
          (1) The term ``implementing bill'' means only a bill 
        of either House of Congress which is introduced as 
        provided in subsection (c) with respect to one or more 
        trade agreements, or with respect to an extension 
        described in section 282(c)(3) of the Uruguay Round 
        Agreements Act, submitted to the House of 
        Representatives and the Senate under section 102 of 
        this Act, [section 1103(a)(1) of the Omnibus Trade and 
        Competitiveness Act of 1988, or section 282 of the 
        Uruguay Round Agreements Act] section 282 of the 
        Uruguay Round Agreements Act, or section 105(a)(1) of 
        the Reciprocal Trade Agreement Authorities Act of 1997 
        and which contains--
                  (A) * * *
          * * * * * * *
  (c) Introduction and Referral.--
          (1) On the day on which a trade agreement or 
        extension is submitted to the House of Representatives 
        and the Senate under section 102 [or section 282 of the 
        Uruguay Round Agreements Act], section 282 of the 
        Uruguay Round Agreements Act, or section 105(a)(1) of 
        the Reciprocal Trade Agreement Authorities Act of 1997, 
        the implementing bill submitted by the President with 
        respect to such trade agreement or extension shall be 
        introduced (by request) in the House by the majority 
        leader of the House, for himself and the minority 
        leader of the House, or by Members of the House 
        designated by the majority leader and minority leader 
        of the House; and shall be introduced (by request) in 
        the Senate by the majority leader of the Senate, for 
        himself and the minority leader of the Senate, or by 
        Members of the Senate designated by the majority leader 
        and minority leader of the Senate. If either House is 
        not in session on the day on which such a trade 
        agreement or extension is submitted, the implementing 
        bill shall be introduced in that House, as provided in 
        the preceding sentence, on the first day thereafter on 
        which the House is in session. Such bills shall be 
        referred by the Presiding Officers of the respective 
        Houses to the appropriate committee, or, in the case of 
        a bill containing provisions within the jurisdiction of 
        two or more committees, jointly to such committees for 
        consideration of those provisions within their 
        respective jurisdictions.
          * * * * * * *

              CHAPTER 6--CONGRESSIONAL LIAISON AND REPORTS

          * * * * * * *

SEC. 162. TRANSMISSION OF AGREEMENTS TO CONGRESS.

  (a) As soon as practicable after a trade agreement entered 
into under section 123 or 124 [or under section 1102 of the 
Omnibus Trade and Competitiveness Act of 1988] or under section 
103 of the Reciprocal Trade Agreement Authorities Act of 1997 
has entered into force with respect to the United States, the 
President shall, if he has not previously done so, transmit a 
copy of such trade agreement to each House of the Congress 
together with a statement, in the light of the advice of the 
International Trade Commission under section 131(b), if any, 
and of other relevant considerations, of his reasons for 
entering into the agreement.
          * * * * * * *

       TITLE II--RELIEF FROM INJURY CAUSED BY IMPORT COMPETITION

          * * * * * * *

    CHAPTER 1--POSITIVE ADJUSTMENT BY INDUSTRIES INJURED BY IMPORTS

          * * * * * * *

                    Subchapter C--General Provisions

          * * * * * * *

SEC. 245. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.

  (a) In General.--There are authorized to be appropriated to 
the Department of Labor, for each of the fiscal years [1993, 
1994, 1995, 1996, 1997, and 1998] 1998, 1999, and 2000, such 
sums as may be necessary to carry out the purposes of this 
chapter, other than subchapter D.
  (b) Subchapter D.--There are authorized to be appropriated to 
the Department of Labor, for each of fiscal years [1994, 1995, 
1996, 1997, and 1998] 1998, 1999, and 2000, such sums as may be 
necessary to carry out the purposes of subchapter D of this 
chapter.
          * * * * * * *

               CHAPTER 3--ADJUSTMENT ASSISTANCE FOR FIRMS

          * * * * * * *

SEC. 256. DELEGATION OF FUNCTIONS TO SMALL BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION; 
                    AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.

  (a) * * *
  (b) There are hereby authorized to be appropriated to the 
Secretary for fiscal years [1993, 1994, 1995, 1996, 1997, and 
1998] 1998, 1999, and 2000, such sums as may be necessary to 
carry out his functions under this chapter in connection with 
furnishing adjustment assistance to firms (including, but not 
limited to, the payment of principal, interest, and reasonable 
costs incident to default on loans guaranteed by the Secretary 
under the authority of this chapter), which sums are authorized 
to be appropriated to remain available until expended.
          * * * * * * *

                  CHAPTER 5--MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS

SEC. 280. GENERAL ACCOUNTING OFFICE REPORT.

    (a) The Comptroller General of the United States shall 
conduct a study of the adjustment assistance programs 
established under chapters [2, 3, and 4] 2 and 3 of this title 
and shall report the results of such study to the Congress no 
later than [January 31, 1980] October 1, 1999. Such report 
shall include an evaluation of--
          (1) * * *
          * * * * * * *

SEC. 285. TERMINATION.

    (a) * * *
          * * * * * * *
  (c)(1) Except as provided in paragraph (2), no assistance, 
vouchers, allowances, or other payments may be provided under 
chapter 2, and no technical assistance may be provided under 
chapter 3, after September 30, [1998] 2000.
  (2)(A) Except as provided in subparagraph (B), no assistance, 
vouchers, allowances, or other payments may be provided under 
subchapter D of chapter 2 after the day that is the earlier 
of--
          (i) September 30, [1998] 2000, or
          (ii) * * *
          * * * * * * *
                              ----------                              


                     INTERNAL REVENUE CODE OF 1986

                        Subtitle A--Income Taxes

          * * * * * * *

                  CHAPTER 1--NORMAL TAXES AND SURTAXES

          * * * * * * *

              Subchapter B--Computation of Taxable Income

          * * * * * * *

                     PART IX--ITEMS NOT DEDUCTIBLE

          * * * * * * *

SEC. 280A. DISALLOWANCE OF CERTAIN EXPENSES IN CONNECTION WITH BUSINESS 
                    USE OF HOME, RENTAL OF VACATION HOMES, ETC.

  (a) * * *
          * * * * * * *
  [(g) Special Rule for Certain Rental Use.--Notwithstanding 
any other provision of this section or section 183, if a 
dwelling unit is used during the taxable year by the taxpayer 
as a residence and such dwelling unit is actually rented for 
less than 15 days during the taxable year, then--
          [(1) no deduction otherwise allowable under this 
        chapter because of the rental use of such dwelling unit 
        shall be allowed, and
          [(2) the income derived from such use for the taxable 
        year shall not be included in the gross income of such 
        taxpayer under section 61.]
          * * * * * * *

         Subchapter O--Gain or Loss on Disposition of Property

          * * * * * * *

              PART II--BASIS RULES OF GENERAL APPLICATION

          * * * * * * *

SEC. 1016. ADJUSTMENT TO BASIS.

  (a) * * *
          * * * * * * *
  (e) Special Rule Where Rental Use of Vacation Home, Etc., for 
Less Than 15 Days.--If a dwelling unit is used during the 
taxable year by the taxpayer as a residence and such dwelling 
unit is actually rented for less than 15 days during the 
taxable year, the reduction under subsection (a)(2) by reason 
of such rental use in any taxable year beginning after December 
31, 1997, shall not exceed the depreciation deduction allowed 
for such rental use.
  [(e)] (f) Cross Reference.--

          For treatment of separate mineral interests as one property, 
        see section 614.
          * * * * * * *

              VII. DISSENTING VIEWS OF CONGRESSMAN RANGEL

    H.R. 2621 is a very significant piece of legislation 
because it extends fast track trade agreement authority to the 
President. It is argued that any President, whether Democrat or 
Republican, must have such authority to be able to negotiate 
and implement trade agreements. It is further argued that the 
President must have such authority in order for the United 
States to be able to continue to provide economic leadership 
for the rest of the world. It is my view that the President 
must be able to provide economic leadership at home before he 
can provide economic leadership for the rest of the world.
    While H.R. 2621 may give the President the tools he needs 
to provide economic leadership around the world, it 
unfortunately does not give the President the tools he needs to 
provide economic leadership at home. Consequently, I am not in 
a position to support H.R. 2621 at this time. Although H.R. 
2621 is similar to a bill recently ordered reported by the 
Senate Finance Committee and is acceptable to the 
Administration, the bill does not adequately address my 
concerns as outlined below.
    As I have publicly stated on numerous occasions in recent 
weeks in the debate on fast track, trade policy in this country 
can no longer be considered in isolation. Trade policy is but 
one component of what should be a comprehensive, integrated 
approach to economic policy-making in this country. 
International trade redistributes income among industries, 
regions, and individuals. Moving further in the direction of 
free trade in this country through the negotiation of 
additional trade agreements should not be done without 
simultaneously addressing questions concerning the fairness and 
the legitimacy of the practices that generate these 
distributional costs, and also addressing how to ensure that 
the poor and disadvantaged in this country are not forgotten as 
our economy is globalized.
    Free trade enhances opportunities for those with the skills 
and the mobility to flourish in world markets. At the same 
time, it exerts downward pressure on the wages of underskilled 
workers in this country; increases economic insecurity; calls 
into question accepted social arrangements, particularly in the 
area of labor-management relations; and weakens social safety 
nets.
    If we are going to continue along the path of freer trade 
in this country, we must complement this tragedy with an 
internal strategy of job creation, as well as compensation, 
training, and social insurance for those groups most at risk. 
We must also have a strategy in particular to create jobs and 
improve the infrastructure of those communities in this country 
where unemployment is chronically high and for whom 
participation in the global economy is still merely a dream. In 
sum, we must have a strategy to give hope and opportunity to 
the chronically unemployed and disadvantaged of this country so 
that they can also share and benefit from the advantages of 
increased trade.
    H.R. 2621 is undoubtedly a good faith effort to reconcile 
conflicting views about fast track but it fails to address 
these related concerns that I have just outlined. For me, these 
related concerns are essential elements of the debate. Until we 
have an overall legislative package that combines fast track 
with legislative provisions to address these concerns in a 
comprehensive and integrated manner, I am not in a position to 
support fast track legislation.

                                                       C.B. Rangel.

                 DISSENTING VIEWS OF CONGRESSMAN LEWIS

    I voted against the fast track proposal because I do not 
believe the legislation sets sound, fair guidelines for trade 
with other countries. If Congress decides to relinquish 
significant authority to the President in fast-track 
legislation, it must set clear parameters. This legislation 
carefully protects intellectual property and investment; 
however it does not do the same for labor, safety and 
environmental laws. We in Congress have a responsibility to 
ensure that fair and safe working conditions and basic 
environmental protections are as important and as protected as 
intellectual property and investment in trade agreements.
    We require American businesses to meet environmental, 
safety and labor laws. Workers cannot be exploited. Child labor 
cannot be used. Water, air and ground pollution are monitored 
and restricted. Laws like these have helped our country build a 
strong middle class and a vibrant economy. American businesses 
have done very well--they meet these requirements, and they are 
competitive.
    If we ask our companies to compete with foreign businesses 
that use slave labor and poison the environment, we are putting 
our companies and our workers at a great disadvantage. Without 
environmental and labor standards in our trade agreements, we 
are encouraging our businesses to move to other countries where 
labor is cheaper and environmental regulations do not exist or 
are not enforced.
    In my own district in Atlanta, Georgia, we used to have a 
telephone repair plant. That plant employed 1000 workers. Those 
were good jobs. They didn't make the workers rich, but they 
earned a living wage. Now these jobs are gone. They have gone 
to Mexico, and my constituents--some of whom had worked there 
20 years--are out of jobs.
    Thanks to NAFTA, we now have a trade deficit with Mexico 
and we have lost jobs. Europe and Japan do not have NAFTA, and 
they have a trade surplus with Mexico.
    It is time to consider a better way to trade. Other 
countries are eager and anxious to trade with the United 
States. We have the greatest consumer market in the world.
    If we include labor, safety and environmental standards in 
trade negotiations, we send the right signal. We give the right 
message. We tell other countries: do not compete with us by 
using child labor and polluting the environment. Compete with 
us on the basis of productivity and creativity. That is the 
fair way to trade. That is the right way to trade.
    Sadly, this bill does not send the right message to other 
countries. This bill says we do not care whether you use child 
labor or forced labor. This bill says we do not care whether 
your companies pollute the water or poison the air. This bill 
says we do not care how safe your products are.
    I do care. That is why I could not support this bill

                                                        John Lewis.

          DISSENTING VIEWS OF REPRESENTATIVE KAREN L. THURMAN

    As compared to the Administration's proposal, H.R. 2621 
contains a number of improvements to safeguard our country's 
domestic food supply. I appreciate the Chairman's recognition 
of the unique characteristics of Florida's perishable and 
import-sensitive crops.
    I opposed this legislation in committee because it fell 
short in these critical areas:
    First, it failed to include provisions for seasonality and 
those commodities that were subject to minimum formula tariff 
cuts during the GATT Uruguay Round Negotiations, and to the 
maximum staging under the NAFTA.
    Second, it fell short of addressing my concerns in the 
areas of job loss, food safety and the integrity of the 
environment. As the Atlanta Constitution recently stated, ``We 
have the world's food, and it's as safe as the environment it 
comes from''. Foodborne illness strikes between 33 and 81 
million Americans each year, unnecessarily costing some 9,000 
lives and an estimated $5 to 15 billion dollars in preventable 
health care costs.
    Finally, Congress and the Administration must look at the 
competitive advantage given to other countries through non-
tariff means. We should not grant the exclusive use of key 
tools of production to our foreign competitors while denying 
the same tools to American producers.

                                                  Karen L. Thurman.