Hearing of the Senate Finance Committee - Congress and U.S. Tariff Policy

Hearing

My guiding principle in six months of negotiating with Chairman Hatch and working with the members
of this committee is that the playbook for trade has to change. It's clear, in my view, that trade
agreements in 2015 must be very different than trade agreements from the "90s. The president himself
said in the State of the Union that previous trade deals haven't always, "lived up to the hype." So our
policies can't be stuck in a time warp.

Twenty-five years ago, nobody carried around iPhones. The Internet was not anything close to the
economic engine it is today. China was only beginning to develop into an economic powerhouse.
Container ships were smaller and the world traded less.

It's a different world today, which is why the legislation the committee is debating this week throws out
the old playbook. Here's some of what's different with this legislation.

First, it will put the focus of enforcement back where it belongs -- on jobs and growth here in America. I
hear a lot of people ask, "Why bother negotiating new trade deals when the existing trade laws aren't
being enforced?" This legislation will help make sure the warning bells go off earlier and more loudly
when other countries try to break the rules. And it will help stop other countries and companies that try
to make end-runs around our laws. It will also break down unfair trade barriers that are preventing
Made in America products from competing on a level playing field in overseas markets.

Second, with this legislation, the U.S. is going to aim higher in its trade deals. In the "90s, labor rights and
environmental standards were unenforceable side-deals in trade agreements. Those side-deals had no
teeth, which meant they weren't much good from the beginning. That's going to change today because
labor and the environment will be core, enforceable elements in trade agreements going forward.
Furthermore, there will be a new emphasis on human rights in trade deals. And protecting an open
Internet and the digital economy will be new priorities.

Third, this legislation is going to fight the excessive secrecy that causes people to be skeptical about
trade. If you believe in trade and want more of it, why have so much secrecy? Under this legislation, any
trade deal will be public for 60 days before the president can sign it. Add in the time it takes to move
through Congress, and that means deals will be public for four or five months. In addition, Congress and
the public will get real-time updates on what's at stake in negotiations. That's a new level of
transparency.

Fourth, this legislation goes further than any TPA bill to protect American sovereignty. It guarantees that
trade deals cannot change U.S. law without congressional action. And foreign companies will have no
more rights in international tribunals than they have in American courts today. There won't be any back
door that would let corporations skirt our laws.

Finally, this legislation protects Congress' ability to hit the brakes on a bad trade deal. This bill is not a
green light for the Trans-Pacific Partnership or any trade deal that comes before Congress. What this
legislation does is raise the bar for future trade deals and challenge our negotiators and foreign
countries to meet it. If they fail, Congress can stop a bad deal dead in its tracks. That's an important
democratic power that I fought to protect.

I'll wrap up by saying that the global middle class will more than double in size by 2030, with most of
that growth overseas. And as I see it, there will be a positive link between the strength of America's
middle class and the growing middle class around the world. Billions of people, for the first time, will be
looking to buy food, computers, cars, and hundreds of other products and services. I bet everybody in
this hearing room would like to see those products and services made and delivered by Americans.
In my view, the legislation under debate this week -- and in the weeks ahead -- is all about fighting for
the Oregon brand and the American brand. This is Congress' best chance to produce middle-class trade
policies and fight for American values around the world. And I'm looking forward to debating how best
to accomplish that.

Source