Dominican Republic-Central America-United States Free Trade Agreement Implementation Act

DOMINICAN REPUBLIC-CENTRAL AMERICA-UNITED STATES FREE TRADE AGREEMENT IMPLEMENTATION ACT

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. WYDEN. Mr. President, I have decided to support CAFTA. Because I know I will have a lot of welts on my back for it, I want to take a few minutes to describe how I arrived at my decision.

A special concern to me is that if CAFTA is rejected, China will have yet another opportunity to grow its economy and strengthen its economic base at America's expense. Why Americans would want to do that defies logic.

China is already an economic juggernaut. But as of now, they are not going to get duty-free exports to Central America. Only the United States has that prospect, and only with CAFTA-DR. If America walks away from this agreement, does anyone really think the Chinese will sit on the sidelines? As the kids say, ``hello!''

The Chinese would love the opportunity to get an economic toehold in our backyard. I, for one, don't think we ought to give them that opportunity. Personally, I believe we ought to be more vigilant in terms of watchdogging trade with China than we have been. That is why last week I pushed the Bush administration to immediately move to do a review of the proposed purchase of Unocal by China's state-run oil company under the Exon-Floria law, to examine the national security and economic implications of a deal that is essentially unprecedented.

If you are a free trader--and I am willing to be called that--you ought to protect your interests. That is why I favor, for example, doing a vigorous review of that proposed purchase of Unocal, and I also propose standing up for our interests in Central America rather than walking away from the region and handing the Chinese yet another golden economic opportunity to strengthen their economic base. In my view, it will be an opportunity we have given up, and gratuitously so.

My view is that with respect to international trade, we ought to make things and grow things in the United States of America and then sell them around the world. Particularly, I want to sell more value-added products made in the United States of America. There is an opportunity in Central America to sell those value-added products made in the United States such as health care equipment, energy production and conservation goods, computer chips, communications gear--a whole host of products. The reason I say that is that the Presidents of various countries in Central America have written me indicating they are prepared to now make those purchases. They are interested in U.S. suppliers.

Some have asked, how is someone in Central America going to have the money to purchase these health care products and chips, computers, and communications gear? The reality is, the first purchases will be made by governments in Central America. The governments have indicated to me they are the ones that want to spend on our value-added products: computers and chips and energy-production devices.

For example, Honduras is starting a ``Telephony for All'' program. They intend to increase dramatically the number of telephones, wireless devices, and the various technologies that will allow them to be part of the information age. We ought to make sure those products are made in our country and sold there. We will have an opportunity to do more of that under this agreement, which will allow us to send American exports into Central America duty free.

Now, I would be the first to say this is not the agreement I would have written. For example, I feel very strongly about using the Jordan Free Trade Agreement as the model for labor and environmental standards. I think it is a major mistake that was not done. I also think our inability to get a strong trade adjustment package into this legislation is something the Senate will greatly regret.

I see my good friend from Montana on the floor, Senator Baucus. He has championed Trade Adjustment Assistance, along with myself and Senator Rockefeller and Senator Coleman. We got 54 votes in the Senate not long ago for our bipartisan legislation to try to assist workers who are adversely affected by trade.

It seems incomprehensible that we cannot modernize this program. It is decades old. It ought to be extended to service workers. There is bipartisan support for it in the Senate. It would be yet another message to the workers of this country, who are out on the shop floors, that we are concerned first and foremost for their well-being.

So I am going to continue to come back and prosecute this cause with the Senator from Montana. The chairman of our committee, Senator Grassley, knows full well how strongly Senator Coleman and I feel about it, because it is unacceptable to me there is not a trampoline for workers who are adversely affected by trade to get other family-wage jobs. We ought to have that opportunity for them to bounce back when they are adversely affected by trade. We have it in other areas. The failure to extend it to service workers, who could be affected by this and other trade agreements, I think is a major mistake.

There are other changes I would have wanted, particularly in the pharmaceutical area. I think this legislation is not well conceived in that it clearly favors brand names over generic ingredients. But I will say to colleagues that even with these concerns--the inability to have a modernization of the trade adjustment program and some of the labor issues addressed in the way I would--it is a bigger mistake to reject this agreement. If you reject this agreement, you send a message to China: You ought to head for Central America as fast as you can because you have an opportunity to get a toehold in America's backyard.

You are denying the opportunity to a lot of American exporters, people in Oregon and other states who make those value-added products, the high-skill, high-wage products and technologies to sell those goods in Central America.

I want colleagues to know I have met with a lot of those companies and the governments in Central America. I would like to see us bring them together. There is no reason why energy production and conservation products made in our country, and computers and chips and health care technologies, should not be sold in Central America, when the governments in that part of the world are prepared to make major purchases.

Let's do more to try to make sure those purchases come from American exporters rather then Chinese exporters. I urge colleagues to support the agreement.

http://thomas.loc.gov/