THIS SEARCH THIS DOCUMENT THIS CR ISSUE GO TO
Next Hit Forward Next Document New CR Search
Prev Hit Back Prev Document HomePage
Hit List Best Sections Daily Digest Help
Contents Display
BIPARTISAN TRADE PROMOTION AUTHORITY ACT OF 2001 -- (Extensions of Remarks -
December 10, 2001)
[Page: E2245] GPO's PDF
---
SPEECH OF
HON. HENRY A. WAXMAN
OF CALIFORNIA
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Thursday, December 6, 2001
- Mr. WAXMAN. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong opposition to H.R. 3005, the
so-called Bipartisan Trade Promotion Authority legislation, also known as
``fast track,'' proposed by Ways and Means Committee Chairman Bill
Thomas.
- While I believe deeply in the benefits of free trade, this shortsighted
bill ignores the need to protect workers and the environment in our
international trade agenda. It also jeopardizes the environmental, health, and
safety laws here in the United States.
- I have supported a number of trade agreements negotiated by Presidents in
the past, but fast track is unique. As the mechanism that authorizes the
President to negotiate trade agreements, it is the one chance Congress gets to
direct the objectives and the scope of the U.S. trade agenda for the next
seven years. It is the primary opportunity for Congress to design trade goals
that reflect American ideals for human rights, labor rights, and environmental
protection.
- It is outrageous that recent trade agreements have given foreign companies
veto power over our regulatory authority at the local, state, or federal
level. I voted against the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA ), in part because Chapter 11 of the agreement gave foreign
companies the right to sue the United States for trade-related financial
losses. The result has been devastating to California and the Thomas bill
would allow the same provisions to be placed in future agreements.
- It is under Chapter 11 , for example, that a Canadian
corporation is suing the United States seeking $970 million in compensation
because of California's decision to phase-out MTBE, a toxic gasoline additive
that leaked from pipelines and storage tanks, poisoning California water
supplies and rendering them unusable.
- In my district, the City of Santa Monica faced MTBE contamination of its
drinking water supply and has had to import more than 80% of its drinking
water. Sadly, this story has been repeated in other parts of the state, as
well as other parts of the country. The Canadian company, which is trying to
prevent the phase-out of MTBE, is seeking $970 million in compensation,
asserting that California's phase-out impeded its business interests and
profits. The case is pending before a closed door NAFTA tribunal with no possibility of
consideration or appeal in U.S. courts.
- I strenuously object to any proposal that would subjugate the health and
safety of American citizens to the profit goals of international corporations.
I strongly believe that the U.S. should not be allowed to undermine the
health, safety, and environment laws of other countries either. I have opposed
efforts by U.S. trade negotiators who have acted on behalf of special interest
groups to challenge foreign laws, such as those designed to protect food
supplies curb smoking, and increase access to life-saving HIV/AIDS medication
in developing countries.
- For example, U.S. trade negotiators, acting on behalf of the
pharmaceutical companies, have tried to use international trade law to
challenge governments in sub-Saharan Africa that are struggling to provide
affordable medicines to people suffering from the AIDS epidemic. In southern
Africa as many as 1 in 4 are suffering from AIDS, more than twelve million
children have been orphaned by the disease, and the overall rate of infection
is eight times higher than the rest of the world. Yet, the Thomas bill
completely ignores this crisis and would allow the trade challenges to
continue.
- Furthermore, the Thomas bill would direct the President to challenges
prescription drug pricing systems that have been implemented in Canada,
Europe, and other countries to keep prescription drug prices from spiraling
out of control. In fact, it may even jeopardize efforts here in the United
States to provide affordable Medicare prescription drug benefits to
seniors.
- And in addition to possibly putting our public health and safety in
jeopardy, the bills shows complete indifference toward labor rights. Meekly
suggesting that countries should enforce their own labor laws, the bill only
promotes the perpetuation of weak labor laws that often allow the exploitation
of child and slave labor, and discriminatory treatment and harassment of labor
activists in violation of the five core standards of the International Labor
Organization (ILO).
- If we want to work toward a progressive world trading system, we should be
working for a world economy that lives up to higher standards instead of
sinking to lower ones.
- We should be expanding and updating our negotiating agenda to reflect the
dramatic changes that have taken place in just the last few years since the
previous Fast Track expired in 1994. There are now new items on the table at
the WTO regarding intellectual property, antitrust law, investment rules,
electronic commerce, product/food labeling, and technology transfer. The
United States has set new precedents by including environmental and labor
standards in the trade agreement with Jordan and trade expansion measures with
countries in the Caribbean and Africa. We should not be prevented from
pursuing these provisions in future trade agreements.
- We should be insisting on more Congressional influence and oversight over
the trade agenda. Unfortunately, the Thomas bill would minimize our role and
stifle any meaningful opportunity for Congress to revoke fast track if the
President violates or ignores key negotiating objectives.
[Page: E2246] GPO's PDF
- The bill also does nothing to increase transparency of the trade
negotiations, deliberations, and rulings veiled in secrecy. It fails to
advocate the publication of negotiating texts, or address the critical need
for changes to dispute settlement mechanisms that are not even open to the
submission of amicus brief by non-governmental entities that have an interest
in the deliberations.
- The Democratic substitute offered by Mr. Rangel and Mr.
Levin, which the Republican leadership unfairly blocked him from
offering, seriously looks at ways to address all of these matters. It would
take advantage of the scarce opportunity fast track offers for Congress to
shape the future of a world trade system with leadership from the United
States on issues important to workers and the environment.
- The bill calls for specific rules to ensure that it would not be a trade
violation for a country to enforce a Multilateral Environmental Agreement
(MEA), such as the treaty prohibiting trade in endangered species. It would
also make progress on the issue of investor provisions by clarifying that
investors protection rules cannot be used to undermine legitimate health,
safety, and environmental laws.
- In addition, the Rangel-Levin bill would explicitly clarify the right of
WTO members to adopt measures necessary to respond to national emergencies
like the HIV/AIDS epidemic by increasing access to essential medicines, and
set at least some limitations on challenges to prescription drug price
containment.
- Moreover, the bill would provide a much stronger role for Congress by
providing a structural biennial review of ongoing negotiations, and a process
for the House to bring a resolution rescinding trade promotion authority to
the floor for a vote if it is supported by at least one-third of the
House.