United States-Korea Free Trade Agreement Implementation Act

Floor Speech

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. GRASSLEY. Well, can you believe it, we are finally here. After several years of waiting for these trade agreements to come to the Congress, it looks as though we are going to be able to vote on them, pass them, and send them to the President for his signature, and they will become law.

Quite frankly, I thought soon after May 10, 2007, we would be voting on the Colombia trade agreement because President Bush was anxious to send it to the Hill. But the Democrats took over the Congress after the 2006 election, and the way it was negotiated by the Bush administration wasn't good enough. There wasn't enough negotiation to go far enough on labor and environment, so the new Democratic- controlled Congress said we have to do more on those negotiations for environment and labor.

So more was renegotiated, and on May 10, 2007, there was a news conference announcing a bipartisan result between the Bush administration and the Democratic Congress on an agreement with Colombia on better environment and labor issues that had been reached. So a bipartisan agreement, particularly when you have a Democratic Congress and a Republican President, you would have expected that right away we would be having at least Colombia up here. At that time, South Korea wasn't completely negotiated. But the other party turned into a protectionist party and so nothing has happened until now. The goalposts have been moved several times, but the free trade reality of creating jobs has come back to the other political party. So I am glad we are here at last, even though it may be 4 years late. We are doing the right thing, even though it is being done later than it should have been done.

Everybody knows that every day in this Congress, and rightly so, with 9.1 percent unemployment, the topic is jobs. And that is as it should be. The question gets asked a lot: What policies can we implement here in the Congress to create jobs or at least to encourage jobs. With over 9 percent unemployment in this country, we should, in fact, be talking about how to have an environment that creates jobs, and freeing up trade is one of the best ways to create jobs. These aren't just creating jobs, these are good-paying jobs. On average, jobs related to international trade pay 15 percent above the national average.

The truth is for years we have known one clear and simple way to create jobs and stimulate growth in our economy, and that is international trade. The Colombia, South Korea, and Panama trade agreements will create and support thousands of jobs, and I believe even hundreds of thousands of jobs. So we must implement the trade deals reached with Panama, South Korea, and Colombia, and we must do it today, even though it should have been done, in the case of South Korea, a year ago and in the case of Panama and Colombia 3 or 4 years ago.

We entered into these agreements back in 2006 and 2007, and there is no excuse why we have had to wait nearly 5 years--until now--to get to them. Yet congressional Democrats, and later President Obama, continued to move the goalposts, putting up barriers that prevented their consideration and passage until this day. There is no clearer or easier way of creating jobs in the near term, and good jobs lasting for a long period of time, than passing these trade bills and doing it now. Thank God the President has said he would sign them.

According to the National Association of Manufacturers, 100,000 jobs will be created by the implementation of these trade agreements. There are estimates from other sources that suggest the number of jobs may be even higher. The administration--and I believe rightly so--believes that the higher number of jobs being created would be in the few hundred thousand. The Obama administration estimates in the case of the Korea trade agreement alone 70,000 additional jobs for the U.S. workforce will be created.

Not only do these trade agreements expand opportunities for U.S. workers, they also present

tremendous opportunities for American agriculture. It is estimated that the Korean agreement could increase the price farmers receive for pigs by $10 per head. So you see in the case of Delaware, where Senator Carper says it is good for his poultry industry because that is so dominant there, where larger livestock is so dominant in the Midwest, in my State of Iowa, it is going to be a very good agreement as well.

The Colombian agreement will level the playing field for U.S. corn farmers so they can begin to reclaim some of the market share they lost due to high tariffs for our products going down there. We have lost markets not just because of the high tariffs but because Colombia, in the last 5 years, has reached agreements with other countries that have allowed those countries, through their agricultural products--particularly grain--to take over the share of the Colombian market that American agriculture previously had.

The agreement with the country of Panama will bring about better opportunities for a variety of agricultural products, including beef, poultry, and pork, to name a few.

We have been waiting a long time to get to this point, and so, as I have said two or three times, because I am satisfied we are going to get the job done, I am eager to cast my vote in support of all three agreements. But as the finish line nears on these agreements, the American people should be asking why President Obama has dragged his feet on these agreements for so long. There has been a lot of wasted time and tax dollars with stimulus programs that were supposed to create jobs but did not produce any measurable amount of jobs; whereas, if these agreements had been in place, these jobs we are talking about creating from this day forward would probably have already been created. The stimulus plan failed to do what President Obama promised Americans, but I am telling you these trade agreements will do what President Obama promises the American people, they will do in the way of creating jobs.

Of course, the President wants to try it again with yet another costly stimulus program, as we were debating yesterday. We don't need more government spending to create jobs. We know that doesn't work. What we need to do is create an environment so the private sector will create jobs. We know what works, and these agreements are part of what works to create jobs. We need to continue opening markets for U.S. exports, and that is what these agreements will do. We need to pass these trade agreements and do it now. American workers need them now and the unemployed need the new jobs that will be created as a result of these agreements.

But for the economic future of our country, we should not stop with these three trade agreements. The President can provide certainty to businesses, farmers, and workers by renewing his commitment to expanding trade opportunities. The best way to do that is to ask Congress to renew his authority to negotiate free-trade agreements through a long-used cooperative process between the Congress and the executive branch of government, involving the Congress giving the President what is called trade promotion authority so he can work further agreements.

In January of 2010, the President said he wanted to double exports by 2015, and that was welcome news. But actions speak louder than words, Mr. President. The President has repeatedly delayed these trade deals. He has routinely dodged the question of when he would request authority for trade promotion to negotiate new agreements, and he has not laid out a clear strategic plan for in fact reaching the trade goals he expressed at the beginning of 2010. We are now nearly 2 years further down the road from that discussion he had.

While it may be tough to reach the goals of doubling exports by 2015, we can still push on toward that goal, as we should. The more we do to open new markets and then get out of the way, the more we will help our struggling economy. There are three steps to continue helping U.S. businesses, farmers, and most of all the workers of America--particularly the unemployed workers of America. First, we need to pass these three trade agreements with no more political gamesmanship by this administration, and I think we are over that hurdle. Secondly, Congress should pass trade promotion authority so the administration can responsibly seek opportunities for greater market access for U.S. products. Finally, the administration must make it a top priority to actually seek more opportunities for opening foreign markets for our products.

We live in a global economy. We once led the way in forming trade agreements and expanding trade relationships. The rest of the world waited for the United States to take the first step.

In recent years, we have lost our way. The rest of the world isn't going to wait on the United States as they did for the last 60 years. That is why we have lost market share in Colombia that I just spoke about as one example.

We need to reestablish our position as a world leader in opening and expanding markets. Passing these trade agreements is crucial and long overdue, but it is a necessary first step. The next step is for the President to seek trade promotion authority and get back in the game leading the rest of the world.

I urge my colleagues to help U.S. businesses, farmers, our workers, and, most importantly, our unemployed workers by voting in support of the Panama, Colombia, and South Korea trade agreements.

I yield the floor.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Source