Ensuring Tax Exempt Organizations the Right to Appeal Act - Continued

Floor Speech

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Ms. BALDWIN. Mr. President, trade is a major issue for a manufacturing State such as Wisconsin. I am very proud of the fact that the State I represent has had a rich history of making things. In fact, I don't think we can have an economy that is built to last that doesn't make things as a key part, a key sector of the overall economy. So this debate on trade promotion authority and the trade bills that may follow to the floor of the Senate and the House take on a particular disproportionate impact in a State such as Wisconsin that makes things.

We have lost a lot of those manufacturing jobs in recent years. We can't lay the entire blame on trade policies, but certainly some of our past trade deals have had a significant impact. It is hard to find folks in the State of Wisconsin who don't recall that in a negative way, who haven't suffered the results of mistakes we have made in the past.

That brings me to this debate we are having this evening and I hope tomorrow and beyond on trade promotion authority. What trade promotion authority asks us to do as Senators in the United States and Representatives over in the House is to cede some of our usual powers--our usual powers to amend bills to make them stronger, to make them more informed, to improve them, to perfect them--fast-track trade promotion authority asks us to relinquish those powers and to take a simple up-or-down, yes-or-no vote on a future trade deal that comes before us under this fast-track authority.

Now, that may bring up the question of why would one ever support ceding those powers and relinquishing those powers, and I think that, ultimately, one hypothetically can do that because what we can do is take the time in the fast-track debate to set the conditions, to set the negotiating principles that have to be met in order to be able to relinquish that power later.

That is where we get into this issue of process right now. It is so critical that we take the time to debate the conditions that we need to see present as representatives of people from States across this country, that we take the time to debate thoroughly these amendments so that we know the trade deals that will come before us later will be fair--not just free but fair. So I hope we take the time to debate all of these provisions because they matter in people's lives. They matter to middle-class, working Wisconsinites, some who have lost jobs in recent years and decades because of mistakes we have made in prior trade deals.

I come to the floor this evening to share with my colleagues that I have filed nine separate amendments to this trade promotion authority. I know we won't have the chance to fully debate and vote on all of them, but I think it is important that we try to have a thorough and comprehensive consideration. So far, we have only voted on two amendments, and there are only a handful that are pending for consideration. So on that point, I wish to take a few moments to address just four of the amendments that I think are crucial to my State of Wisconsin and the middle-class workers whom I have the honor of representing.

My first amendment is No. 1317. It is cosponsored by my colleagues Senator Franken and Senator Blumenthal. It strengthens the principle negotiating objective with respect to trade-remedy laws. This is talking about enforcement and having teeth in that enforcement. These trade remedies ensure that American manufacturers and their workers would compete on a level playing field globally.

American manufacturers fight an uphill battle to keep their prices low while foreign companies sell goods in the United States often at subsidized prices. U.S. manufacturing has already suffered financial losses--and thousands of jobs, I might add--as a result of unfair trade practices. My amendment would strengthen our ability to fight on behalf of our American manufacturing workers.

A second amendment I have offered is No. 1365, and I am proud to have joined forces with Senator Blumenthal. It would restrict trade promotion authority for any trade agreement that includes a country that criminalizes individuals based on sexual orientation or otherwise persecutes or punishes individuals based on their sexual orientation or gender identity. These countries are identified for us in the State Department's annual Country Reports on Human Rights Practices.

At least 75 countries across the globe continue to criminalize homosexuality, subjecting lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender people to imprisonment, various forms of corporal punishment and, in some countries, the death penalty. For example, in Brunei, a newly adopted law provides for execution by stoning for homosexuality. As we all know, Brunei is part of the Trans-Pacific Partnership free-trade agreement that is now under negotiation.

Senators voting here on this legislation should know and understand this. If we do not adopt my amendment, we will be granting our highest trading status to a country that executes people based on whom they love. This is not hyperbole. This is a fact. The United States should not reward countries that deny the fundamental humanity of LGBT people by subjecting them to harsh penalties and even death simply because of who they are or whom they love.

My third amendment, No. 1320, would add a principal negotiating objective to ensure that any trade agreement actually increases manufacturing jobs and wages in the United States. Many Wisconsin communities, as I mentioned earlier, bear the scars of NAFTA and other flawed so-called free-trade agreements. From closed factories to foreclosed homes to devastated communities, Wisconsinites know all too well what happens when politicians in Washington tell them that they know what is best for them in Wisconsin.

Let me give a few numbers on trade from Wisconsin's perspective.

On jobs, according to the Economic Policy Institute, NAFTA has led to the loss of more than 680,000 jobs, most--60 percent of them--manufacturing jobs in the United States as a whole.

Since China joined the WTO in the year 2000, there has been a net loss of over 2.7 million U.S. jobs. Of that amount, Wisconsin has lost around 68,000 jobs between the years 2001 and 2013 because of our trade deficit with China and their currency manipulation.

Now, in 2011 we passed the South Korea Free Trade Agreement. In the years since, the growth of the U.S. trade deficit with South Korea has cost us more than 75,000 U.S. jobs.

On wages, competing with workers in China and other low-wage countries, it has reduced wages of 100 million U.S. workers without a college degree, a total loss of about $180 billion each year.

Since China joined the WTO, U.S. workers who lost their jobs because of trade with China have lost more than $37 billion in wages as a result of accepting lower-waged jobs.

The final amendment I wish to describe is amendment No. 1319, cosponsored by my colleague Senator Merkley, who was speaking with all of us earlier this evening. This amendment would require the administration to notify the public when it waives ``Buy American'' requirements. Wisconsin workers make things, and we have been one of the top manufacturing States in the Nation for generations. Now, if we hope to continue making things, we think we should continue to have our own government as a customer. Or, put another way, U.S. taxpayer dollars should support U.S. jobs. That is why I am a strong supporter of ``Buy American'' provisions that require Federal agencies to purchase American-made products. Free-trade agreements have historically allowed foreign nations way too much leeway when bidding for our government projects and contracts while not affording American companies the same access.

Now, I believe the issues I have brought up this evening and these four amendments are really important issues--important to our country, important to our standing in the world, and important to my State of Wisconsin. These are issues that the Senate should debate. I urge the majority leader to allow an open and robust amendment process so that we can vote on these critical provisions.

With that, I yield the floor.

I suggest the absence of a quorum.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Source