Max Baucus

Mr. BAUCUS

Mr. BAUCUS. Madam President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. BAUCUS

Mr. BAUCUS. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the following staff of the Finance Committee be granted floor privileges for the duration of the debate on the debt limit: Claire Green, Omar DeLeon, Elizabeth Samson, Amanda Summers, Johannes Echeverri, Whitney Lott, Samson Chen, Harun Dogo, David Sklar, and Amanda Bartmann.

Mr. BAUCUS

Mr. BAUCUS. I yield back the remainder of our time.

Mr. BAUCUS

Mr. BAUCUS. I wish to add my name as a cosponsor to the resolution.

Mr. BAUCUS

Mr. BAUCUS. Mr. President, in only two weeks, many critical tax incentives will expire. These provisions are vitally important to many families and businesses. Once again, Congress is leaving town without taking care of business. Once again, Congress is creating uncertainty. During these tough economic times, uncertainty in the tax arena is the last thing that Americans need. Today families are struggling because of lost jobs and high costs. Extending expiring tax incentives will help many American families get through these tough times. For example, with the rising cost of a higher education, families need help to cover their costs. The Tax Code includes a tuition deduction to assist college students with the rising cost of tuition. In 2009, about 2.4 million families took this much needed benefit. Also expiring is a provision that gives tax relief to the people that we trust with America's future, our children. Many teachers dedicated their lives to educating our young people. To further this endeavor, teachers take money from their own pockets to buy supplies for the classroom. Many do not get much help with these costs. The least we can do is provide a little tax relief. This bill would extend the teacher expense deduction. Over 3.8 million families took this deduction in 2009. There are also several provisions expiring that benefit American businesses. Without the tax incentives, businesses will have less certainty and fewer tools to compete in the global arena. This will further hamper job creation and growth. One such incentive is the research and development credit. The provision rewards companies that strive to create new and improved products and services by performing research and development. The extension of the R&D credit is essential to American businesses being competitive in the global market. The extension of the R&D credit will boost America's economy and create good-paying jobs. There are also several provisions expiring that incentivize businesses to invest in alternative fuel sources. For example, the dollar-per-gallon credit for biodiesel and renewable diesel helps move us to a cleaner and more energy independent future. These are just a few of the provisions that must be renewed each year. Members on both sides of the aisle worked hard to extend these and many other provisions before the end of the year. We must continue to work to get these provisions extended so that American businesses and families can continue to receive these tax incentives. We must not keep people in limbo. That is one of the very first and highest priorities we have when we come back in session in January. I have been working with ranking member Hatch for more than a year now on broad-based, fundamental tax reform. That reform is much needed and long overdue. A bedrock principle for reform is to increase the certainty that Americans have in what their tax laws will be from year to year. So we will work hard to eliminate temporary provisions that are dependent on the whim of Congress at the end of each year for renewal. In the interim, it is time to extend these provisions.

Mr. BAUCUS

Mr. BAUCUS. Mr. President, Henry Clay once said: Of all the properties which belong to honorable men, not one is so highly priced as that of character. It is my distinct privilege to rise today to speak on a nominee that possesses such character, Dana Christensen. The Senate will soon take up Dana's nomination for U.S. district judge for the District of Montana. To ensure the most ethical and qualified attorney was appointed as district judge, I created an advisory selection panel made up of five Montana lawyers with diverse legal backgrounds from across our State and across party lines. I said to them: You just get me the best, the four or five best people I can choose from. I do not care if they are Republicans or Democrats or liberals or conservatives, you just get me the very best qualified. That is what they did. From them I chose Dana Christensen, and the panel unanimously and enthusiastically recommended the nomination of Dana Christensen. I was proud to pass this recommendation on to the President. Dana is a fourth generation Montanan, raised in Missoula, MT. He graduated from Stanford University in 1973, received his law degree from the University of Montana Law School in 1976. Dana started his legal career at the Billings, MT, law firm of Moulton, Belingham, Longo & Mather, and then moved to Kalispell in 1981 to join the law firm of Murphy, Robinson, Heckathorn & Phillips. In 1998, Dana and two of his partners formed a new firm in Kalispell, MT, which has become one of the leading firms in Montana for civil defense, business law, real estate, and estate planning. Dana has tried more than 50 trials in State and Federal courts. He has an active mediation and arbitration practice. Outside of the office, Dana has been an active member of his community: a member of the board of directors of his local chamber of commerce, a member of the University of Montana School of Law board of visitors, and a member of the faculty of the University of Montana Advanced Trial Advocacy Program. Over the past 35 years, Dana has commanded the respect of his colleagues across the State of Montana and elsewhere. Dana has received the highest rankings from peer review organizations, Chambers USA and Super Lawyers. He is also a member of the selective American Board of Trial Advocates and the American College of Trial Lawyers. Upon his nomination in May, Montana's legal community lent their strong support for Dana's selection. U.S. District Judge Richard Cebull, who was appointed by President George Bush in 2001, said: I do not think there is a better prospect in the whole State. U.S. District Judge Sam Haddon, also appointed by President Bush, echoed his colleague. Judge Haddon said: He's a good lawyer, a good man, and in my opinion, ethically totally qualified. The district will be well served by him. I have gotten to know Dana over the past several decades. I could not agree more with Judge Sebold and Judge Haddon. Dana embodies those qualities that Montana and America need on the Federal bench: intellect, extensive experience in the courtroom, commitment to public service, integrity, and respect for precedent and the rule of law. I congratulate Dana, his wife Stephanie, and his wonderful children, Cassidy and Ben, on this extraordinary achievement. I urge my colleagues to join me in supporting his nomination. I yield the floor.

Mr. BAUCUS. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded.

Mr. BAUCUS

Mr. BAUCUS. Mr. President, I rise in support of Senator Merkley's calling for the withdrawal of American troops from Afghanistan. I support bringing our troops home for two reasons: First, we can't afford what we are spending today in Afghanistan. Second, we need to focus on nation building here at home. We are spending $10 billion per month in Afghanistan. Every dime of it is deficit spending. We should listen to the former Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Admiral Mullen. He said our debt is the top security threat facing the United States. We can't continue down this path. Our troops continue to serve heroically on some of the toughest missions imaginable. They have done everything we have asked of them-- and we have asked a lot through weekends and holidays, over frigid mountains and hot deserts. The service of the men and women of the military has been nothing short of remarkable. It is now time to hand over the responsibility of this war to the Afghans. Afghan President Hamid Karzai recently held a Loya Jirga, or grand assembly, among leaders and elders from across Afghanistan. The assembly approved a resolution calling for the Afghans to take the lead role of the war effort. Let's take them up on their offer. Let's not have American men and women doing the work that Afghans want to do for themselves. For years we have been putting war spending on our national credit card. In 2003, I joined Senators Biden and Conrad in offering an amendment to the Iraq supplemental appropriations bill that would have offset the war spending. Instead of adopting the amendment, Congress elected to pay for the war with deficit spending. Over the past decade, we have grown our debt by $1.3 trillion due to war spending alone. The President's budget projects $500 billion dollars in war spending in the coming decade. This spending is in addition to the trillions we will spend on the defense base budget. This endless deficit spending is simply not sustainable. During our work on the Joint Select Committee on Deficit Reduction, every member of the panel came to a better appreciation of the difficult financial decisions we face as a nation. There is no choice: we have to balance our books. But how we balance our books will reflect who we are as a nation, what our values are, what our goals are. Most important, these choices will determine whether the 21st century will be the American century or whether we will cede our leadership to countries such as China. In the year ahead, Congress will make a number of hard choices, and we must be strategic about these choices. We will choose among essential investments in education, infrastructure, health care for our veterans and seniors, and maintaining the best military in the world. And every month we spend $10 billion dollars in Afghanistan will limit what we can do at home. Every dollar we send to Afghanistan is one less dollar we have for health care for our seniors or education benefits for our veterans. The tough choices must be made at a time when the world is changing rapidly. During his final press conference as the U.S. Ambassador to Japan on November 14, 1988, Mike Mansfield said: [Japan and the United States] will work together in the next century which will be the Century of the Pacific. Our two nations working together will be able to compliment and guide the rest of the world as it moves into this area, into the [Pacific] basin, because we both realize that it is in that Basin where it all is, where it is all about, and where our joint future lies. Looking back 23 years later, his remarks seem prescient. According to the World Bank, China's average annual GDP growth rate since 2001 has been 10.4 percent. Asian developing nations collectively had an average growth rate of 9.1 percent. The United States has seen an average growth of just 1.7 percent. The 21st century will not be the American century if we don't change course. During the first decade of this century, we spent $5.9 trillion dollars on defense spending, much of it in Iraq and Afghanistan. During that same decade, China spent $1.1 trillion. Now, which nation's power increased more during that period? China is flexing muscles abroad not with shiny new weapon systems but with their growing financial power. China is now the second-largest economy in the world, and it continues to grow. We are seeing our influence wane around the world not because we are short an aircraft carrier but because some have begun to question American resolve, the ability of American political process to solve basic problems and to govern. Meanwhile, millions of Americans are out of work and struggling to make ends meet. Last year, I asked the Congressional Budget Office to prepare a report on income inequality in this country. The statistics are sobering. The top 1 percent of earners in the United States more than doubled their share of income in the past 30 years. The wealthiest fifth of the country earned more than the other four-fifths combined. These are only but a few of the great challenges we face at home, and to overcome these challenges we have to work together. To compete and win in today's world, we need to balance our budget, grow our economy, and invest in education and infrastructure. We can't afford another year of spending tens of billions of dollars on nation building overseas. For the 21st century to be the American century, we are going to have to make some changes. We need to bring our troops home from Afghanistan and focus on nation building here at home. I urge my colleagues to support Senator Merkley's amendment.

Mr. BAUCUS

Mr. BAUCUS. Mr. President, today I wish to recognize the work of a group of students enrolled in the Scholars Program at Flathead Valley Community College in Kalispell, MT. As a member of the Joint Select Committee on Deficit Reduction charged with coming up with a plan to tackle the deficit, I asked my bosses--the people of the great State of Montana--to send me their ideas on how to reduce the deficit. Montana was built upon hard work, sacrifice, and values born on the frontier that remind us: we are all in this together. It is the same spirit that the Joint Select Committee must tap into in order to succeed. So far, I have received over 1,200 letters, calls, and e-mails from Montanans with thoughts on deficit reduction and ideas that implicate all aspects of the Federal budget. Montanans sent their suggestions on programs to trim or eliminate, where we could find additional sources of revenue, and where Congress should tread carefully, to not lose sight of those investments critical to the future of Montana and the entire United States. The challenge facing the Joint Select Committee also poses an important opportunity for us to learn as a nation and as students of history. That is why I invited Montana's colleges and universities to involve students in the discussions. Flathead Valley Community College took on this challenge with vigor. FVCC decided to incorporate this project into its Scholars Program, an honors program for the college's top students. The students spent almost a month on the project. As we have done in the Joint Select Committee, students started by reviewing reports issued by the Congressional Budget Office and the various bipartisan deficit-reduction plans. The students then met over a 2-week period to discuss their own ideas and debate the merits of each proposal. They all agreed that the group would come up with one plan to put forth to my office and to Congress. Now, before I talk about what the students have produced, it is important to say a word about Flathead Valley Community College and the community it serves. Kalispell, MT, is located in the upper northwestern corner of the State of Montana. Glacier National Park sits to the east, and the tip of Flathead Lake is to the south. There are few places in the world privileged to such natural beauty. But this area has not been immune to the tough economic climate. Far from it. The Flathead area, once dominated by the wood products industry, has witnessed the closure of some of its largest employers. While Montana's overall unemployment rate has remained below the national average, Flathead County is well above it, right now at almost 10 percent. Surrounding Lincoln, Sanders, and Lake Counties currently sit at 13, 13.3, and 10 percent unemployment rates, respectively. Flathead Valley Community College has come to be viewed as the model for 2-year education, both in Montana and nationally. And like many 2-year colleges across the country, FVCC has experienced a significant increase in enrollment as a result of the economic downturn. Both young and old are returning to school to enhance their skills. Over the past 2 years, FVCC's enrollment increased by 43 percent. Last year, FVCC added 239 sections of classes and hired 89 new adjunct faculty members to meet increased demand. This past spring, FVCC graduated the largest class in its history, with 388 students receiving 438 degrees. One-fourth of those students were eligible for assistance through trade adjustment assistance or the Workforce Investment Act. I raise this because it is important to note that these students participating in this project are living this economic recession. I asked them to discuss and come up with deficit-reduction ideas. But they have done so with a keen eye on how these ideas could affect their community and the long-term impact on good-paying jobs. After all the discussions, debates, and, undoubtedly, some disagreements, the students came together and submitted a full summary of their proposal to reduce the deficit. The ideas are wide-ranging and span virtually all aspects of the Federal budget. For example, the students recognized that health care costs in this country pose a threat to the fiscal stability of the Nation. The students identified a series of ideas that could help in reducing health care costs, including incentivizing healthier lifestyles. The group also agreed that Congress should consider ideas for revenue. They highlighted areas such as corporate tax loopholes to find new sources of revenue. The students said Congress should look at reducing fraud and abuse in current programs. While the students devoted most of their time to finding ways to reduce the deficit, they also highlighted the importance of investment. The group agreed investment in education and scientific research is an important role for the Federal Government to play. As their report states, ``many of the fiscal problems facing the country could be ameliorated by improving citizens' chances for a quality education.'' I could not agree more. My hat goes off to the students and faculty for joining this important conversation for our families and for our country. It is clear from this report that they took this challenge seriously and understand the balance needed to address the deficit. I would like to recognize the great work of those involved, including President Jane Karas, Ph.D., Scholars Program Director Ivan Lorentzen; Outreach Coordinator for Career Pathways Jeremy Fritz; and Executive Director for Institutional Research Brad Eldredge, Ph.D. And, most importantly, I would like to commend the students who took on this project: Ursula DeStefano, Tracy Lost-Bear, Lisa Steelye, and Heather Frayle. It is my goal to make sure these students and their peers nationwide will be able to find good-paying jobs when they graduate. I am doing everything I can to address both our jobs deficit and our fiscal deficit so that we can leave our Nation in better shape than we found it for these students and their children. I thank Flathead Valley Community College, the instructors, and students for their thoughtful ideas. I hope the experience inspired them to stay involved. They took this project seriously and worked hard to find agreement. We in Congress must do the same. The future for these students and this country is at stake.

Mr. BAUCUS

Mr. BAUCUS. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

Mr. BAUCUS

Mr. BAUCUS. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to speak for a minute on this motion.

Mr. BAUCUS. Mr. President, we all agree that the contractors who contract with the Federal Government should pay their taxes. I don't think there is any dispute on that. There is also agreement that we should not overburden small businesses which are paying their taxes. The bill before us would repeal the provisions scheduled to go into effect in 2013 to require a withholding of 3 percent of payments from the U.S. Treasury to the government contractors. There are two flaws in this. One, it lets all government contractors off the hook, even those who refuse to pay taxes. Those contractors would not be subject to the mechanism to make sure they pay. Second, this is paid for by rescinding $30 billion of appropriated funds, which is, frankly, contrary to the agreement reached with the President on the deficit reduction. I ask colleagues to oppose the cloture motion to proceed to the bill.

Mr. BAUCUS

Mr. BAUCUS. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to have a memorial to the extraordinary life and service of Jerry Hildebrand printed in the Congressional Record.

Mr. BAUCUS

Mr. BAUCUS. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded.

Mr. BAUCUS. Mr. President, a Native American expression on the circle of life offers insight into a life well-lived: If you were born, you cried and the world rejoiced. Live your life so that, when you die, the world cries and you rejoice. On Sunday, the world cried when Elouise Cobell left the Earth. Elouise was a brave member of the Blackfeet Nation from my home State of Montana. She fought tirelessly for what was right. On Sunday, the world lost a great hero. Native American people everywhere lost a champion. Her husband Alvin and son Turk, along with her entire extended family, lost an admired and irreplaceable loved one. And I can say with deep gratitude, having worked with her for many years, that I lost a dear friend. Through her persistence and determination, she drew attention to the Federal Government's mismanagement of Indian trust lands. She deserves the highest recognition and thanks for helping close a chapter on a bitter history of broken promises. For more than 100 years, the Federal Government did not fairly compensate Native Americans in Montana and across the Nation for revenue generated from their land. The Federal Government squandered and wasted billions of dollars in not paying Native Americans revenues they were due. It was Elouise who took up the cause. Others wouldn't; she did. She knew it was wrong. She knew it, and she had a mission. She worked tirelessly through the courts until the judicial system finally recognized what she had uncovered. The judge in the case decried the Federal Government's action as ``fiscal and government irresponsibility in its purest form.'' I was proud and humbled to work with her on the legislative plan to help settle the longstanding Indian trust lawsuit. Last year, we passed bipartisan legislation to provide a long-overdue conclusion for hundreds of thousands of folks in Indian Country. Recently, I joined my colleague, the present occupant of the chair, Senator Tester, who introduced legislation to award Elouise with the Congressional Medal of Honor, the highest honor possible from Congress. Elouise Cobell fought for many who could not fight for themselves and brought a voice to many who died before being able to see justice served. May we never forget Elouise's long battle to right this wrong. May Elouise's memory continue to inspire everyone who believes justice is worth the fight. And may the Creator welcome Elouise home with joy and tenderness as we offer our thoughts and prayers to her loved ones. Our hearts are heavy as we mourn Elouise. Because she lived a life worth living, she lived a life worth rejoicing. Mr. President, I yield the floor and suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. BAUCUS. Mr. President, I would like to speak against the amendment offered by the Senator from Arizona, Mr. McCain, amendment No. 740. This Chamber approved three free-trade agreements last week and did so with overwhelming support. But for many, that support hinged on passage of a robust trade adjustment assistance program, otherwise known as TAA. Last month, the Senate approved trade adjustment assistance, and during floor consideration an amendment similar to the one offered by Senator McCain was rejected. Why was it rejected? I will tell you why. Because a majority of Senators in this Chamber want to help small businesses. We want to help small businesses improve their competitiveness, and we want to help small businesses take advantage of the opportunities trade provides. But this amendment would end the Trade Adjustment Assistance for Firms Program. It would end the only program specifically designed to help small manufacturers hurt by import competition. It would end the program that helps companies adjust, retool, and stay competitive in an increasingly global economy. In 2010, trade adjustment assistance for firms enabled 330 companies to devise strategies that got them back on track. It helped them identify new markets. It helped them improve inefficiencies. It helped them restructure their debt, and it helped them find new financing. The results proved that the Trade Adjustment Assistance for Firms Program works. Ninety-eight percent of the companies that participated in the program are still in business after 5 years. Without trade adjustment assistance for firms, many of these companies would be out of business and their workers out of jobs. The program has helped create or retain more than 50,000 good-paying manufacturing jobs since 2006. I would think that with unemployment at such high rates--over 9 percent--and with the large vote in this body on the currency amendment with respect to the Chinese manipulation of currency, it makes eminent sense to help American workers who lost jobs, not prevent help to American workers who have lost jobs on account of trade. And that is what the Trade Adjustment Assistance for Firms Program does--it helps American workers who have lost jobs on account of trade. Senator McCain's amendment will put those jobs at risk. I don't think that is what this body wants to do. We should be creating jobs, not destroying them. For these reasons, I urge my colleagues to vote no on the amendment. I yield the floor, and I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. BAUCUS

Mr. BAUCUS. Mr. President, the English poet, Thomas Gray, once said: ``Commerce changes the fate and genius of nations.'' The United States has always understood that commerce improves our fate and sharpens our genius. We know opening the channels of commerce creates new opportunity, generates new ideas, and forms new partnerships. We know global commerce makes us more competitive, more innovative, and more productive--but also sometimes more difficult. Today, the Senate has a historic opportunity to build on this legacy by approving our free-trade agreements with Colombia, Panama, and South Korea. These agreements will increase exports of U.S. goods and services. They will create tens of thousands of good-paying American jobs. They will bind us even more closely to the three important allies. Colombia, especially, has returned from the brink of becoming a failed state to being the third largest economy in Latin America and one of its most respected leaders. It is astounding just how far Colombia has come. It has a lot further to go, but considering the state of Colombia 15, 20 years ago, with the narcotics trade, paramilitary forces, and assassinations, it is amazing how far they have come. A lot of this goes to the courage of the Colombian people, and especially to the leaders. It has not been easy, to say the least. Panama is the crossroads of global commerce and among the fastest growing economies in the Western Hemisphere. South Korea is the world's 15th largest economy, our seventh largest trading partner, and a strategic ally in a very volatile region of the world. Now, more than ever, we need to expand commerce and improve our economic fate. Clearly, with unemployment at 9.1 percent, our economy is growing too slowly. Consumer demand is too weak, and American workers, farmers, and ranchers are desperately seeking new markets and customers for their products. The Colombia, Panama, and South Korea trade agreements will help U.S. exporters gain new customers in three lucrative and fast-growing markets. They will increase U.S. exports by up to $13 billion each year. They will boost our GDP by more than $15 billion, and they will support tens of thousands of urgently needed American jobs. It will help the jobs picture--clearly, it will not solve it, but it will help. These agreements will help folks such as Errol Rice, a fifth generation cattle rancher from Helena, MT. Earlier this year, Errol testified before the Finance Committee on the importance of the South Korea trade agreement. He told us that South Korea is the fourth largest market in the world for U.S. beef, and it is growing rapidly. Errol welcomed the commitments I secured to increase funding for market promotion and fully implement our bilateral beef import protocol. But he underscored that our position in the South Korean market is at risk. Australia, a large beef exporter, is racing to conclude its own trade agreement with South Korea. By approving our agreement with South Korea today, we will help Errol and all American ranchers maintain their competitive edge, increase sales, and create jobs in their communities. Trade agreements improve our economy only if they create a level playing field for U.S. exporters. We cannot allow our trading partners to gain unfair advantage by failing to respect workers' rights or protect the environment. That is why the Colombia, Panama, and South Korea trade agreements include robust labor and environmental commitments that were basically made in 2007, with all the labor and environmental framework included in these agreements. These commitments require our trading partners to uphold internationally recognized labor rights, including the right to organize and bargain collectively. That is in the agreement. They also required our partners to protect the environment, and these obligations are fully enforceable, just like the commercial obligations in the agreements. In many cases, our free-trade agreement partners have gone the extra mile to meet our high standards. Colombia is the best example. Many of us are concerned about labor violence in Colombia. We believe the death of even one union member is one too many. I urge my colleagues to consider the progress Colombia has made in recent years and the commitment of the Colombian Government to continue that progress. Colombia demonstrated this commitment in April when President Obama and Colombian President Santos agreed to the Labor Action Plan. In that plan, Colombia made specific and groundbreaking commitments to strengthen worker rights, protect workers from violence, and prosecute the perpetrators of violence. Colombia has fulfilled every commitment to date. It has hired 100 new inspectors to enforce workers' rights. It has cracked down on the abuse of cooperatives. It has expanded protection of union members. It has sentenced to prison 47 people found guilty of killing union members. There is still more to be done, but Colombia has demonstrated remarkable progress. By approving the free-trade agreement, we will be able to enforce labor rights in Colombia, including the rights addressed by the action plan. If we reject the agreement, however, we lose our ability to ensure that labor conditions in Colombia will continue to improve. This is a very important point. Other countries' trade agreements with Colombia don't have the labor protection provisions. The U.S. one does have labor protection provisions that are very strong. If we don't ratify this agreement, then workers in Colombia will not be protected because other agreements don't protect them. These trade agreements will also help us rise to the challenge of China. Today, China is the No. 1 trading partner for South Korea and No. 2 partner for Colombia and Panama. If we approve these agreements, we will give American exporters a leg up on competitors from China and other countries. If we reject them, China's advantage and influence in these markets will only grow. After we approve these agreements, we should begin thinking about the next steps for our trade agenda. We should invite our new free-trade agreement partners to join the Trans-Pacific Partnership, or TPP, negotiations. We need to negotiate a Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement and extend these agreements to better facilitate even more jobs in America. Colombia, Panama, and South Korea have demonstrated that they are willing to make the far-reaching commitments that our trade agreements require. Their participation in the TPP negotiations will help us achieve a high-standard 21st-century agreement that spans the Pacific. Thomas Gray was correct when he said commerce changes the fate and genius of nations. There is no better example than the United States. We have benefited greatly from trading with foreign nations. In these tough economic times, we need to embrace these benefits now more than ever. For the sake of American exporters seeking to grow and create jobs, let's approve these three free-trade agreements. One final point. I think it is fair to say that as we engage in commerce worldwide in countries around the world, we are not totally pure. We don't wear white hats, and other countries are not Darth Vaders and wear black hats. But it is true the shade of gray of our hats are a lot lighter shade of gray than the shade of gray of their hats, which is a darker shade. That is especially true in the American, Asian, and African countries--maybe a little less true in European countries. These agreements are no-brainers. Why do I say that? Because with respect to Colombia and Panama, products, goods, and services coming to our country today are virtually duty free, virtually no tariffs, or nontariff trade barriers. On the other hand, American products going to those countries today face very high tariffs and trade barriers, especially with agriculture but also in manufacturing goods. The figures are quite startling, frankly. So it is a no-brainer. These are, for the first time virtually, free-trade agreements. It is a freebie for U.S. exporters and American companies exporting products into Colombia and Panama. They are really free. With respect to Korea, it is very similar. Korean manufacturing tariffs, tariffs that Korea has on U.S. goods are more than twice as high as U.S. tariffs on Korean-manufactured goods. Tariffs that U.S. companies face in trying to export to Korea are twice as high today as are the tariffs the Korean manufacturers face when they try to sell products in the United States. The average Korean tariff on U.S. agricultural goods is 54 percent. The average tariff on American agricultural goods that we are trying to sell in Korea is 54 percent, about 5 times as high as the tariff on Korean agricultural products as they attempt to ship to the United States. That is why this is a no-brainer. This is so simple. Everybody should be for this agreement. It creates a more level playing field. I urge my colleagues to support this agreement. When they read the agreement and understand the terms, it should go through with no opposition because we are, in fact, helping Americans, American jobs. The only wrinkle I hear about is Colombia. I have been there. When one is in Colombia--and I have known their leaders, the past two Presidents--it is clear that they have made huge progress. If we reject this agreement, I submit that the progress made thus far will slip, and the conditions in Colombia will start to deteriorate. We must pass these three trade agreements. Also, the U.S. political- geopolitical position in South America is critical. If we adopt this agreement, that will enhance America's geopolitical position in South America. If we don't do it, Colombians are going to say: We have given up on the United States. We have been trying to negotiate this for over 5 years. Then where are they going to go? They will embrace Venezuela or China. I yield the floor.

Mr. BAUCUS

Mr. BAUCUS. Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. BAUCUS. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded.

Mr. BAUCUS. Mr. President, what is the regular order?

Mr. BAUCUS. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that all remaining time be yielded back, with the exception of 15 minutes, to be equally divided between Senator Baucus and the Republican leader, with Senator Baucus controlling the first 7\1/2\ minutes; that upon completion of their remarks, the Senate proceed to votes on passage of H.R. 3080, H.R. 3079, and H.R. 3078 as provided under the previous order; that there be 2 minutes, equally divided, in the usual form between the votes; and that all after the first vote be 10-minute votes.

Mr. BAUCUS. Mr. President, my remarks will be brief because we are at a point, finally, where we are passing these three trade agreements. The Colombia, Panama, and South Korea Free Trade Agreements will increase U.S. exports by $13 billion, boost gross domestic product by more than $15 billion, and support or create tens of thousands of American jobs. These agreements will provide an economic boost at a time when our country sorely needs it. But the value of these agreements goes well beyond dollars and cents. In recent years, critics of the United States have argued we have surrendered our leadership role on international trade. They claim our government, with its divided powers and narrow and changing partisan majorities, is incapable of forming a consensus for expanding trade, let alone a consensus on other political matters, including reducing our national debt. Today, we have the opportunity to prove our critics wrong. These agreements were negotiated by a Republican President, improved by a Democratic President, and will be supported by strong bipartisan majorities in the House and in the Senate. They demonstrate the best of American values--open markets, transparent regulation, and respect for labor rights and the environment. They set the standard by which all trade agreements will be judged, and they put to rest any doubt the United States will engage its global partners to establish trade rules that are both free and fair. By approving these agreements, we will also bind ourselves even more closely to three of our most important allies, and we will demonstrate to countries around the world that the United States is a good and dependable partner. One decade ago, Colombia was on the brink of collapse. Armed conflict raged, drug traffickers flourished, violence against workers flared, and the economy stagnated. The United States pledged its support for Plan Colombia. With that plan, we provided more than $7 billion to Colombia to fight drug trafficking, spur development, and protect human rights. With our assistance, Colombia has achieved amazing progress. It is healing from the wounds of conflict. It has demobilized 50,000 former combatants, stemmed the flow of illegal drugs and the violence associated with it, and it is reducing labor violence and strengthening worker rights. If we approve our free-trade agreement with Colombia, we will help Colombia solidify and build on these gains, and we will reap for ourselves the benefits of our significant investments in this important country. Panama has been a friend and ally since its early days as a nation. In the early 20th century, the United States built the Panama Canal, which remains the world's greatest commercial hub. We helped the Panamanian people restore democracy in 1989 after 20 years of military rule. Today, Panama is among the fastest growing countries in the Western Hemisphere. It is both the crossroads of international trade and a global financial center. It is also a close partner in the fight against the illegal drug trade. With the Panama Free Trade Agreement, we will further strengthen our relationship for decades to come. South Korea is a strategic ally in a region clearly vital to U.S. national interests. Despite living under the constant threat of a dangerous and erratic neighbor, South Korea has become the 15th largest economy in the world. Last year, it served as President of the G20 group of countries. This trade agreement we have concluded with South Korea is our largest bilateral agreement in nearly two decades. It will ensure our commercial relationship is as strong as our 60-year security partnership. These free-trade agreements will deliver significant economic benefits to the American people. Let us renew a bipartisan consensus on trade, reaffirm U.S. leadership in the global economy, and cement our ties with three important partners. Let us approve our free-trade agreements with Colombia, Panama, and South Korea. I might add, before I yield to the Republican leader, that the order of the agreements is, first, on Panama, then South Korea, and then Colombia.

Mr. BAUCUS. Mr. President, I ask for the yeas and nays.

Mr. BAUCUS. I thank the Chair. Mr. President, we are now voting on the Panama TPA to provide lucrative new opportunities for American farmers. It will level the playing field for American exporters and do a lot of stuff. Let me say this. Basically, we accept virtually all Panama's products duty free--virtually. Panama has significant duties on products going into Panama. This is a free-trade agreement. It is a freebie. I urge Members to vote for it so now we can export more products to Panama. Vote for this agreement.

Mr. BAUCUS. Mr. President, I appreciate the Senator from Ohio showing us the big, long stack. Those are all the tariffs Panama is going to get rid of and reduce so we can sell more products to Panama. I appreciate the Senator pointing that out to us.