[Page: H3147]---
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under a previous order of the House, the gentleman from Texas (Mr. COMBEST) is recognized for 5 minutes.
Mr. COMBEST. Mr. Speaker, the vote on permanent normal trade relations with China may be one of the most important votes that we will cast in years.
China represents an agricultural market that is vital to the long-term success of American farmers and ranchers. Agriculture trade with China can strengthen development of private enterprise in this country and bring China more fully into the world trade membership. We intend to work for that goal and urge all of U.S. agriculture to join with us.
China's participation in the WTO will result in at least $2 billion per year in additional U.S. exports within the next 5 years. That is just U.S. agricultural exports.
By 2005, the largest increases in the annual value of China's net agricultural imports are likely to be $587 million for corn, $543 million for wheat, and $359 million for cotton.
According to the Economic Research Service, net farm income would be higher by $1.7 billion in 2005 and higher by an average of $1.1 billion over the years 2000 to 2009 for each year.
Listen to what agricultural groups are saying about China PNTR. The U.S. wheat growers say that PNTR represents a potential 10 percent increase in U.S. wheat exports. The U.S. pork producers believe that China PNTR will pave the way for an increased value in hogs by $5 a head.
Poultry producers say that because China is already the largest export market for poultry, $350 million in 1999, under PNTR it can become a $1 billion market in just a few years.
Cattle producers believe that a vote against PNTR is a vote against them. They expect to almost triple beef export to China by the year 2005.
Corn growers believe that they have an opportunity to immediately triple their 5-year average of corn exports to China with acceptance to PNTR.
Some who oppose PNTR for China will weigh that China is an agricultural glut and will never buy U.S. commodities. That is not true according to USDA's Economic Research Service. They say that China's accession to the WTO means that U.S. farmers and ranchers can sell an additional $1.6 billion worth of agricultural products in 5 years.
On top of that, $400 million of U.S. fruits, vegetables, and animal products can be sold by 2005 upon China's entry into the WTO. That is $2 billion more of agricultural exports in 5 years. This view is supported by the widespread support among U.S. agricultural commodity groups for China PNTR.
Still, others argue that China is self-sufficient in agriculture production and that it produces enough to feed its own people and does not need U.S. wheat or corn or any commodity. But listen to what the Worldwatch Institute Chairman Lester Brown said. He said that China's water supplies in its grain-producing areas are falling at a high rate. He sees massive grain imports and growing dependence on U.S. grain.
The reality is that no one can predict the future. China imports large amounts of U.S. agricultural commodities right now, some through Hong Kong, $2.5 billion in 1999 of agriculture, fish, and forestry products.
Greater access to Chinese markets means greater opportunities for U.S. high-quality agriculture products. As the diets of the Chinese improve, there will be more demand for high-quality agricultural products and value-added food products. This is what U.S. farmers and the food industry can provide to Chinese consumers.
It must be remembered that China has access to the U.S. market right now. China will become a member of WTO; and after its accession to the WTO, it will still have access to the market. The vote for PNTR will decide whether U.S. agriculture will have improved access to Chinese markets or that we will see that market to the competitors of U.S. agriculture.
We have all heard the argument that PNTR is not necessary and that if Congress rejects China PNTR that U.S. exporters still will attain the benefits of China's WTO accession. But the General Accounting Office says that the full benefits of the November 1999 agreement negotiated by the U.S. will not be available unless Congress adopts China PNTR.
[Page: H3148]
Tariff concessions will be available, but there will be no way to enforce these. No enforcement mechanisms will be available, and the U.S. will not be able to use WTO dispute settlement provisions. The WTO dispute settlement is a critical weapon to ensure U.S. trading rights. The ability to enforce the tariff rate quotas will be undermined. The U.S. could not challenge Chinese export or domestic subsidies that hurt U.S. exports in third countries. We could not enforce the benefits of the sanitary and phytosanitary agreement that was negotiated with the Chinese and is so important to U.S. citrus, wheat, and meat products.
Additionally, the special safeguards provision to protect against import surges negotiated by the U.S. would not be available.
Unless Congress grants China PNTR, there will be no way to ensure that tariff and access concessions will be available to U.S. agricultural exporters. WTO dispute settlement provision will not be available to the U.S. Those who are concerned about making sure China keeps its part of the bargain should support PNTR. Without WTO dispute settlement provisions, any ability to ensure Chinese compliance is severely weakened. According to a May 11, 2000 article in the Washington Post many of China's dissidents back China's accession into the WTO. This is what they are saying:
Bao Tong, one of China's most prominent dissidents, says that Congress should pass China PNTR. Mr. Bao believes that China should be included in as many international regimes as possible so that it must adhere to these international standards. Referring to congressional passage of PNTR, Mr. Bao says, ``It is obvious this is a good thing for China.'' He goes on to say ..... ``I appreciate the efforts of friends and colleagues to help our human rights situation, but it doesn't make sense to use trade as a lever. It just doesn't work.''
Dai Qing, perhaps China's most prominent environmentalist and independent political thinker, says ``All of the fights--for a better environment, labor rights and human rights--these fights we will fight in China tomorrow. But first we must break the monopoly of the state. To do that, we need a freer market and the competition mandated by the WTO.'' According to Ms. Dai, ``One of the main economic and political problems in China today is our monopoly system, a monopoly on power and business monopolies. Both elements are mutually reinforcing. The WTO rules would naturally encourage competition and that's bad for both monopolies.
Zhou Litai, one of China's most prominent labor lawyers and represents dozens of maimed workers in Shenzhen, says, ``American consumers are a main catalyst for better worker rights in China. They are the ones who pressure Nike and Reebok to improve working conditions at Hong Kong and Taiwan-run factories here. If Nike and Reebok go--and they could very well (if the trade status) is rejected--this pressure evaporates. This is obvious.''
Mr. Speaker, there will be irreparable damage done to American agriculture if Congress does not pass PNTR.
END