24 March 2000
Text: Senators Roth/Moynihan Introduce China Trade Bill March 23
(Bipartisan push on permanent Normal Trade Relations status) (2360) Senators William Roth (Republican of Delaware) and Daniel Moynihan (Democrat of New York) introduced March 23 the senate bill (S. 2277) that would give permanent Normal Trade Relations (NTR) status to China. They called for an early vote on the issue which would involve ending the application of Title IV (the so-called Jackson-Vanik amendments) of the Trade Act of 1974 to China. The legislation, Roth told the Senate, would end the annual normal trade relations renewal process required by the Jackson-Vanik provisions. "The legislation I am introducing is the same as that sent up by the administration," Roth said, "it is a clean bill, and I believe we should keep it that way." By not allowing amendments to the legislation, supporters of permanent NTR status for China believe the chances of the bill being voted on and being passed are improved. The two senators agreed that a vote on the bill could take place "within a month." Coming from a Senate Finance Committee hearing earlier in the day, where Roth and Moynihan heard testimony for and against the proposed legislation, they urged their Senate colleagues to approve permanent NTR status for China. "If we fail to pass permanent NTR," Roth warned, "then every member economy of the World Trade Organization will gain such access except the United States. Our European, Japanese and Asian competitors could not hope for a more lucrative gift, and all at the expense of our farmers and workers." Moynihan echoed the sentiments of his Republican colleague. "The Agreement," Moynihan said, "will dramatically cut import barriers currently imposed on American products and services. It is enforceable and will lock in and expand access to virtually all sectors of China's economy." The New York Democrat added that he thought the vote on granting permanent NTR status to China would likely be "the most important legislative decision we have made in a decade or will make for a decade. "Let's do it," Moynihan said. Following is the text the senators' remarks from the Congressional Record: (begin text) STATEMENTS ON INTRODUCED BILLS AND JOINT RESOLUTIONS U.S. Senate March 23, 2000 Mr. ROTH. Mr. President, I rise today for myself and Senator Moynihan to introduce legislation that will make normal trade relations with the People's Republic of China permanent when China accedes to the World Trade Organization. The legislation I am introducing is the same as that sent up by the administration. It is a clean bill, and I believe we should keep it that way. Last year, the Chinese made a series of bold commitments to United States negotiators to open their market in return for WTO accession. In sector after sector -- and by a date certain -- the Chinese have pledged to open their markets to foreign goods, investment and services. These openings represent an unparalleled opportunity for U.S. farmers, manufacturers, and service providers to expand their exports into a rapidly growing market. Those commitments will help move the Chinese economy toward a rules-based system and end many forms of state control. In essence, China has conceded that its future depends on the replacement of its communist-style economy with an open, market-oriented system based on the rule of law. Indeed, in a number of sectors, economically backward China will be more open to American exports than some of our developed-country trading partners in Asia and Europe. What must the United States give away in terms of access to our market in return for China's pledge to enact these sweeping reforms? The answer is as striking as it is simple: absolutely nothing. The cost of our access to China's market is simply to comply with our own WTO obligations. Indeed, for the United States to reap the benefits of China's open markets once it joins the WTO, the only act necessary is passage of this legislation. This legislation will thus end the annual normal trade relations renewal process required by the Jackson-Vanik provisions in current trade law. Some believe we must retain the annual renewal process because it gives us leverage in checking China's conduct on a number of fronts. But the annual debate on renewing normal trade relations has not been a very effective means of achieving any of the goals we all share with respect to China: peaceful settlement of the Taiwan question; enhanced human rights, religious freedom and stronger worker rights for the Chinese people or curbing China's irresponsible behavior on security matters. But the active involvement of United States firms in China can only help open that society and reinforce the changes already under way in China toward free markets and a rules-based society. The enormous benefits of enacting permanent normal trade relations, on the other hand, are clear. Just as clear is the huge cost of failing to do so. In passing PNTR, American workers, farmers and exporters will gain access to market-opening concessions the Chinese made to our negotiators after 13 long years of hard negotiations. If we fail to pass PNTR, then every member economy of the World Trade Organization will gain such access except the United States. Our European, Japanese and Asian competitors could not hope for a more lucrative gift, and all at the expense of our farmers and workers. Here is what Leonard Woodcock, many years the President of the United Auto Workers, had to say in support of PNTR 2 weeks ago: American labor has a tremendous interest in China's trading on fair terms with the U.S. The agreement we signed with China this past November marks the largest single step ever taken toward achieving that goal. The agreement expands American jobs. And while China already enjoys WTO-based access to our economy, this agreement will open China's economy to unprecedented levels of American exports, many of which are high-quality goods produced by high-paying jobs. With that sentiment I most strongly agree. What about the rights of Chinese workers themselves? On this point I agree with Mr. Woodcock, as well. To be sure, nothing in the U.S.-China trade agreement requires that free trade unions be formed in China. Yet the WTO does not require this of any of its 136-member countries, and the WTO is the wrong instrument to use to achieve that goal. We should, instead, be asking a more important question: Are Chinese workers better off with this agreement? The answer is a resounding yes. With so little to lose in ending the annual renewal process and so much to gain by enacting PNTR, I would hope this body will pass this legislation overwhelmingly. Mr. MOYNIHAN. Mr. President, I rise with enthusiasm to join our chairman in introducing this measure which is word for word as the President sent to us on March 8. In doing so, he put the matter clearly enough. He said: The Agreement will dramatically cut import barriers currently imposed on American products and services. It is enforceable and will lock in and expand access to virtually all sectors of China's economy. The Agreement meets the high standards we set in all areas, from creating export opportunities for our businesses, farmers, and working people, to strengthening our guarantees of fair trade. I point out, sir, that the negotiations that have led us to this point have taken 13 years. They began prior to the creation of the World Trade Organization, under its predecessor, the GATT. It has been hard slogging, painful, detailed work, but it has come to a conclusion. China wants into the WTO, the World Trade Organization. The price is to give us access to her markets. She has access to ours; hence, the imbalance of our trade, which is enormous just now. I say, sir -- and I think it would be agreed to -- this will be very likely the most important legislative decision we have made in a decade or will make for a decade. At issue is the opening of American and world markets, which followed the calamitous conditions brought about by the Smoot-Hawley tariff in 1930. The opening began by Cordell Hull, in the form of the reciprocal trade agreements. Every President since has expanded and continued this process. You see it all around you in unprecedented prosperity in those countries which first participated. Now China wishes to do so. The condition is that we share in the Chinese market. It could not be more simple. We are not giving them anything they do not now have. They are giving us the treatment that is required by a member of the World Trade Organization. Just this morning, the Wall Street Journal reported, in a Wall Street Journal/NBC poll, that a solid majority of Democrats -- almost 2 to 1 -- is in favor of this legislation. I am hesitant to tell my revered chairman that Republicans do not do as well. But on balance, the American people sense this. They have had the experience of it for three generations now. Let's do it. We had a fine hearing today. We had wonderful testimony from respected scholars on the subject -- Merle Goldman from the Fairbanks institution -- well, from Boston University -- Nelson Graham, East Gates Ministries International, who is the son of the Rev. Billy Graham, and Michael A. Santoro, a professor from Rutgers. The case is so clear, it should not be obscured or delayed. It is up to us. I think there is going to be another hearing, at least. I believe it is the intention of the chairman to have a legislative markup and, as we say, actually reporting out a bill in about a month's time. Mr. ROTH. I say to the distinguished leader, it is my intent to bring this up at least within a month. Mr. MOYNIHAN. At least within a month. Mr. ROTH. I think the sooner we can move on it, the better off we are. I expect this legislation to be adopted with overwhelming bipartisan support. Mr. MOYNIHAN. Exactly so. It should. I do not think we can name it for you, but it certainly will be one of the great measures you have achieved in a long career, not yet concluded. I would observe that it took some prodding to get the legislation sent up to us. In his State of the Union Address on January 27, 2000, the President called upon Congress to pass legislation authorizing PNTR for China `as soon as possible this year.' It took almost two months to get the Administration to produce a draft of the legislation, which the President formally transmitted to Congress on March 8. But we have it now, and the President is fully committed to this, and we ought to move swiftly. I want to clarify one important point: passage of this legislation will not determine whether China enters the WTO. China will enter the WTO regardless of Congress' action with respect to PNTR. But until we grant China PNTR, we cannot enter in to a full WTO relationship with China, which means that we cannot reap the full benefits of the trade agreement. This is because the WTO -- under the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade 1994, the General Agreement on Trade in Services and the Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights -- requires that WTO members grant each other immediate and unconditional normal trading relations status. We do not do so now with respect to China. China's trade status is conditioned on an annual review of China's compliance with the so-called Jackson-Vanik freedom-of-emigration provisions of the Trade Act of 1974. The President makes a determination by the third of June each year, which is then subject to review by the Congress. Because of this conditionality, the trade treatment that we currently accord China is insufficient under WTO rules. Until we grant China PNTR, we must invoke the WTO's so-called `non-application' provision -- that is, Article XIII of the Agreement Establishing the World Trade Organization -- meaning that WTO benefits will not apply. Simply put, we must grant China permanent normal trade relations status in order to reap the benefits that the United States, its workers and its companies will gain from China's entry into the WTO. And we ought to do so promptly. Mr. ROTH. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the legislation be printed in the Record. There being no objection, the bill was ordered to be printed in the Record, as follows: S. 2277 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, SECTION 1. TERMINATION OF APPLICATION OF TITLE IV OF THE TRADE ACT OF 1974 TO THE PEOPLE'S REPUBLIC OF CHINA (CHINA). (a) Presidential Determinations and Extension of Nondiscriminatory Treatment: Notwithstanding any provision of title IV of the Trade Act of 1974 (19 U.S.C. 2431 et seq.), the President may -- (1) determine that such title should no longer apply to China; and (2) after making a determination under paragraph (1) with respect to China, proclaim the extension of nondiscriminatory treatment (normal trade relations treatment) to the products of that country. (b) China's Accession to the World Trade Organization (`WTO'): Prior to making the determination provided for in subsection (a)(1) and pursuant to the provisions of section 122 of the Uruguay Round Agreements Act (19 U.S.C. 3532), the President shall transmit a report to Congress certifying that the terms and conditions for China's accession to the WTO are at least equivalent to those agreed between the United States and China on November 15, 1999. SEC. 2. EFFECTIVE DATES. (a) The extension of nondiscriminatory treatment pursuant to section 1(a)(1) shall be effective no earlier than the effective date of China's accession to the WTO. (b) On and after the effective date under subsection (a) of the extension of nondiscriminatory treatment to the products of China, title IV of the Trade Act of 1974 shall cease to apply to that country. (end text) (Distributed by the Office of International Information Programs, U.S. Department of State - www.usinfo.state.gov)
|
NEWSLETTER
|
| Join the GlobalSecurity.org mailing list |
|
|
|
