    [Public Papers of the Presidents of the United States: George W. Bush (2008, Book I)]
    [May 23, 2008]
    [Pages 719-724]
    [From the U.S. Government Publishing Office www.gpo.gov]

    Remarks on World Trade Week
    May 23, 2008

        Thanks for coming. Please be seated. Welcome to the White House and
    the South Lawn. It's a joy to welcome entrepreneurs and business leaders
    and folks who understand the importance of this country being confident
    enough to work to open up markets for our goods and products and
    services. I'm--obviously, some of the exporters are pretty good sales
    men and women. After all, they let you drive a tractor here on the South
    Lawn. [Laughter] Imagine what the Secret Service was saying.
        I'm really pleased to welcome Members of the Congress; Congressmen
    Petri and Herger are here. Thanks for coming. Petri is here because
    he's a--he believes in--the Harley-Davidson is a product that people
    around the world ought to be able to drive by making it more
    affordable--I suspect that's why you're here--as well as some other
    trucks made in your State.
        I want to thank the members of the Cabinet. Thank you all for being
    such strong advocates of free and fair trade. We've got the Secretary of
    Agriculture here, Secretary Schafer. His
    being here sends a message that the American farmer and rancher expects
    us to work hard to open up markets for the products they grow. So if
    you're a farmer out there in the heartland, it seems like you'd want
    somebody working on your behalf here in Washington to be able to make it
    easier for you to sell your crops. And that's exactly what we're doing
    in this administration. Mr. Secretary, thanks for coming.
        Carlos Gutierrez is the Secretary of
    Commerce. Trade means commerce. Elaine Chao
    is here from the Department of Labor. Madam Secretary, thank you. Your
    presence here is clear recognition that the more products we sell
    overseas, the more likely it is somebody's going to work.
        And today I'm going to spend some time so our fellow citizens
    understand the importance of trade by connecting trade with products
    with jobs. Good jobs policy is a good trade policy.
        I appreciate very much Sue Schwab here.
    She's the U.S. Trade Representative. Her job is to open up markets. And
    I'm going to talk about three trade agreements that she's worked hard to
    put in place that open up markets for U.S. goods and services. I really
    appreciate John Veroneau joining us as
    well. He's the deputy. His job

    [[Page 720]]

    is to also work with the Ambassador to open up markets.
        I want to thank Federico Humbert, the Ambassador de Panama. I want to thank Lee Tae-
    sik, Ambassador from South Korea. I want to thank
    Mariana Pacheco, who is the Deputy Chief of
    Mission for the Embassy of Colombia. These are three nations I'm going
    to be talking about. I want to thank you all for coming. It's a--I
    really appreciate you giving me a chance to talk about your countries in
    your presence, because I want your leaders to understand the Bush
    administration and a lot of Members of Congress believe it's in our
    national interest that we have free and fair trade with your nations.
        I thank the representatives of the companies whose products are
    here. I want to thank the members of the business community. And thanks
    for your caring about your country.
        But first of all, the--you know, it's a rough economic times. Small-
    business owners know what I'm talking about; large-business owners know
    what I'm talking about. It's a period of uncertainty. And one way to
    deal with uncertainty in the economy is to work from your strengths. One
    strength, of course, is to trust the American people. And the best way
    to trust them is to keep your taxes low. I mean, we really don't need to
    be sending--[applause]. If there's uncertain times, there's no worse
    signal to send, that, you know, we may be raising your taxes. That
    creates even more uncertainty. There's got to be consistency in the Tax
    Code so people can plan, so individuals can plan and small business can
    plan and large businesses can plan. Congress needs to make the tax
    relief we passed permanent in order to deal with the uncertainty in the
    economy.
        Of course, they got a huge appetite for spending your money, so it
    shouldn't surprise you that some up there really do want to raise your
    taxes. And we'll do everything we can and--that we're not going to let
    them raise your taxes. But the best signal that Congress could send, for
    the sake of economic growth and vitality, is that we're going to keep
    your taxes low by making the tax cuts permanent.
        Another thing Congress can do is pass trade agreements that open up
    markets. You know, 40 percent of our growth last year--during a time of
    economic uncertainty, 40 percent of the growth came as a result of
    exports. So when I say, play to our strength, one of the strengths
    during this period of time is to continue to export products. If the
    growth that we had during some quarters, recent quarters was as a result
    of exports, it seems like we ought to be working to create more exports
    to be able to sell our goods and services into more markets.
        And we have an opportunity to do that by opening up markets with
    Colombia, Panama, and South Korea. You know, we trust you to create
    jobs. The Government ought to trust you by opening up more markets, by
    making sure the playing field is level for our producers. That's all we
    want. We just want to be treated fairly in the world.
        For some in Washington, trade is a good political issue. In other
    words, people think it makes good politics to say, ``We're not going to
    let you trade.'' But what they've got to understand--those voices of
    pessimism and voices of protectionism must understand that oftentimes,
    opening up markets means the difference between giving employees a pay
    raise or a pay cut. The politicians in Washington who use trade as an
    issue to frighten voters must understand that opening up markets can
    mean the difference between expanding the number of workers, as opposed
    to shrinking the number of workers.
        And our fellow citizens, I understand, you know, have got concerns
    about trade. And the reason why we've asked you to bring some of your
    products here is to remind people that that motorcycle is made by
    American workers, and that if we're able to more likely sell those
    motorcycles into

    [[Page 721]]

    Colombia, for example, or Panama or South Korea, that the worker who
    made that is more likely to get a pay raise or have somebody else join
    him or her on the floor. That's the practicality of trade.
        The interesting thing about trade as an issue, if you really study
    the issue of free and fair trade, leaders from both parties have been
    strong advocates for opening up markets. They really have been. I mean,
    generally this has been a--not nearly as bitter an issue in the past as
    it is today. You know, I remember reading about John F. Kennedy's stand
    on trade. He was a strong believer in free and fair trade. My
    predecessor, President Clinton, worked
    hard to open up markets. It's interesting that a lot of the people that
    worked with the President have been here to the White House to, I guess,
    first, test my temperature to determine whether I really was willing to
    strongly advocate opening up markets. And then when they realized that
    they had a steady ally, were willing to go out and declare publicly that
    they believed that we ought to open up markets.
        And yet today, there's just a different attitude, evidently. But I
    want to thank you for helping to try to change that attitude by bringing
    a practical--some practical thoughts to this debate, kind of fight
    through all the rhetoric and remind our fellow citizens that--of some of
    the facts. One, our economy grows better when we export; two, there are
    jobs. When we talk about trade, we're talking about helping people keep
    work. And it turns out, if you're working for a company that exports
    goods and services, you make better money. Isn't that an interesting
    fact? If you're working for a company that sells goods and services
    overseas, you're going to make more money than your neighbor in a
    comparable industry.
        If you're a farmer--we got some products here, grown right here in
    the United States of America. If you're a farmer, it seems like you want
    people to work hard to make it easier for you to sell that orange
    somewhere else. Increased demand means it's more likely you'll be able
    to sell your crop.
        Trade is in the interests of the working people here in America,
    pure and simple. Trade is in the interests of small-business owners and
    farmers and ranchers, pure and simple. And that's why I'm a strong
    believer that the United States Congress needs to pass trade agreements
    with Colombia, Panama, and South Korea.
        Now, let me give you some of the practical lessons of why. Take
    dairy products: There's a 20-percent tariff on dairy products from the
    United States into Colombia; 36 percent into Korea. That means that the
    cost of that dairy product--chunk of cheese--you know something about
    cheese, Petri, in Wisconsin--a chunk of
    cheese is going to be 20 percent more expensive, which makes it harder
    to sell that product.
        When you say, level the playing field, what I'm talking about is
    reducing tariffs on goods and services, which makes it easier to sell
    product. In other words, it's less expensive. The quality is the same.
    We're really good at what we make and what we grow. The quality is the
    same, but the price is less, which makes it more likely something is
    going to be purchased.
        Fruits, oranges--these oranges right here are taxed at 15 percent
    going into Colombia--they're 15 percent more expensive, 30 percent more
    in South Korea, and 15 percent more in Panama. Broccoli, they got a
    really high tariff on broccoli at my father's house. [Laughter] But there also happens to be one: 15
    percent in Colombia, 27 percent in South Korea, and 15 percent in
    Panama.
        So those are percentages, but you need to think about the percentage
    in terms of, it's that much more expensive to buy. And sometimes if
    you're shopping for an orange, that 15-percent differential means you're
    not going to buy it. Motorcycle--that motorcycle right there is 20
    percent more expensive in Colombia, 8 percent more in Korea, and 15
    percent more in Panama.

    [[Page 722]]

        And so the purpose of a trade agreement is to reduce those tariffs,
    is to make the products less expensive. So if we get the deal done with
    Colombia, that motorcycle will be $4,000 less expensive. The great
    quality of Harley will be the same. There will be no diminution of how
    cool one is when they drive a Harley. [Laughter] But it's going to be
    easier for somebody to buy it.
        This Case tractor--by the way, manufactured in Fargo, North Dakota--
    called a Case IH, will be $15,500 cheaper in Colombia. That could be a
    significant difference when it comes to somebody buying that tractor.
    And I hope the Case workers hear me loud and clear: The cheaper that is
    for somebody to buy in Colombia, the more work you're going to have.
        The reason I brought these products here is, it means somebody is
    making them today and is going to be able to make them tomorrow if we'd
    level that playing field. And let me tell you why I talk about leveling
    the playing field. The first vote coming up is Colombia. I say, the
    first vote coming up is Colombia--you might remember, the vote has never
    been allowed to come up. The Speaker of the House pulled a parliamentary maneuver that sent a bad signal,
    and so it hasn't come up yet.
        Our job is to say, let the people vote, let the Members of Congress
    vote. I like our chances if they let the Members of Congress vote.
    Congress has a way of sorting through all the noise and all the
    pessimism and oftentimes reaches the right conclusion.
        Most of the goods coming from Colombia enter America duty free--
    isn't that interesting?--as a result of actions of Congress in the past.
    Most goods that Colombia makes comes to our country without any tax. And
    I've just described to you, the goods and services we send to Colombia
    are taxed. And that frankly doesn't seem very fair to me. It didn't seem
    fair to the Colombian Government either. They all--they agree with me:
    Let's just treat each other fairly.
        Their goods are not taxed; our goods are. It seems unfair to me. And
    people of Congress should understand how unfair it is to the workers in
    their districts or the farmers in their districts or the people who are
    working hard for a living in their districts that count upon selling
    goods overseas.
        So the agreement we reached basically says that those oranges will
    go in duty free. Some of the products will go in duty free immediately;
    some of them will be phased in over time; but nevertheless, the playing
    field will be level. So here you hear, free and fair trade; that's the
    definition of free and fair trade. Colombia treats us just like we treat
    them. That's fair.
        Secondly, the Colombia free trade vote, like these other free trade
    votes, have got national security implications. Colombia has got a very
    bold leader named President Uribe, who is
    a reformist. Panama has got a strong leader, who, by the way, went to Texas A&M University. He's a
    reformist. I had the honor of meeting the South Korean President at Camp David--first South Korean President to have
    come to Camp David--and I did so for a reason. Because I wanted to send
    a strong signal about our friendship with the people of South Korea.
    He's a strong, strong leader. All these leaders have got a clear vision
    about enhanced prosperity in their country. They care deeply about their
    people.
        President Uribe has got a unique
    challenge in Colombia. He's facing a group of narcotraffickers who are
    violent, who use force to achieve political objectives, who are
    supported by some of the countries in the neighborhood. They're a threat
    to peace inside Colombia, and they provide a threat to the United
    States, in the sense that they--to the extent that they facilitate drug
    trafficking. It makes it here. And yet the President has stood strong in
    dealing with these folks. He is a clear example of a leader who has set
    the--an agenda that

    [[Page 723]]

    is bold, and he's following through with that agenda.
        If we were to turn our back on Colombia by rejecting the free trade
    agreement, it would send a terrible signal to leaders willing to be
    courageous. It would send a bad signal to our friends. And in the case
    of Colombia, it would send a bad signal to the voices of false populism
    in South America. It's in our economic interest that we pass trade
    agreements. Oh, I know there's great debate about that. But I hope that
    people listen to the facts and understand the practical consequences of
    opening up markets for the products made here in the United States. Then
    they'll understand why all of us are so passionate about making sure
    we're treated fairly.
        There's also a significant national security concern when it comes
    to America turning its back on friends. The region needs democracy; the
    region needs rule of law; the region needs stability; and the region
    needs strong leaders like President Uribe. And a rejection of the free trade agreement with
    Colombia will undermine that which the leader--the region needs.
        It's interesting, I've been--you know, I constantly talk to fellow
    leaders on the telephone, and as you know, I've been traveling as well.
    And the--I've been asked quite frequently, ``Why is it that your
    Congress won't pass a free trade agreement with Colombia, for
    starters?'' And they ask that question first with amazement. They can't
    believe the great United States of America is not confident enough or
    wise enough to level the playing field when it comes to U.S. goods and
    services.
        And once the tone of amazement passes, then there's this serious
    tone of concern--concerned about the United States becoming
    protectionist, concerned about the United States losing its confidence
    when it comes to the entrepreneurial spirit that has made us great,
    concerned that we really don't seem to care about the plight of others.
    Because trade helps lift people out of poverty, trade is a powerful
    engine for change.
        And all I can tell them is, is that politics is too strong right
    now. But I also tell them, I haven't given up hope. I haven't given up
    hope that that Colombia free trade agreement is going to make it to the
    floor of the Congress, and with your help, I hope you get it there. I
    haven't given up hope that the people will recognize that obstructionism
    is not leadership, that obstructing an important piece of legislation,
    not even allowing it to come to the floor for a vote, is not what the
    people expect.
        And so my call on the leadership in the House is to let this trade
    agreement get to the floor; let the representatives of the people
    decide; let there be an open and honest debate about the merits of this
    piece of legislation, the merits from an economic perspective and the
    merits from a national security perspective. And then when you pass a
    Colombia free trade bill, we go to South Korea and Panama and get those
    bills passed. And then we can go to the people who are making these
    products here and say, we did the job you expected us to do.
        Thank you all for coming. May God bless you.

    Note: The President spoke at 10:54 a.m. on the South Lawn at the White
    House. In his remarks, he referred to President Martin Torrijos Espino
    of Panama; and President Lee Myung-bak of South Korea. The Office of the
    Press Secretary also released a Spanish language transcript of these
    remarks. The World Trade Week proclamation of May 15 is listed in
    Appendix D at the end of this volume.

    [[Page 724]]