David Dreier

Mr. DREIER

Mr. DREIER. I would like to engage in a discussion, if I might, with my friend from Worcester who has just, in response to my quest to recognize that the measure that is before us today that is a job- creating measure will, in fact, Mr. Speaker, enjoy strong bipartisan support--and everyone acknowledges. I mean, all one needs to listen to is the minority floor manager of this measure that this issue is a jobs-creation item.

Mr. DREIER. I yield to my friend from Worcester.

Mr. DREIER. Reclaiming my time, Mr. Speaker, I thank my friend for his very thoughtful contribution. Let me respond to his points. Mr. Speaker, this is the President's jobs bill that we are considering today right here on the House floor. The President stood just over the gentleman's shoulder and addressed a joint session of Congress on the issue of job creation and economic growth and how he wanted his jobs bill brought forward. Do you know what he said to us? He said we needed to pass the Colombia, Panama, and Korean free trade agreements. And guess what? With bipartisan votes, we have embraced and supported that provision of the President's jobs bill.

Mr. DREIER. I yield to my friend.

Mr. DREIER. Mr. Speaker, now I will reclaim my time to say that, since my friend has brought up the issue of Colombia, and we've disagreed on this for a long period of time, there are 40 million consumers in Colombia. And right now there are people who are union workers at Caterpillar and at John Deere and at Whirlpool and other manufacturing companies in the United States who are going to have access to those consumers because of the agreement that we have put into place.

Mr. DREIER. I yield to my friend.

Mr. DREIER. I would like to reclaim my time, if I might, to say to my friend that if one looks at the jobs that have been created in the manufacturing sector of our economy--and I'm very sympathetic to those workers that my friend has just spoken about in his district; but, Mr. Speaker, I think it's important for us to note that the United States of America today is still the number one manufacturing country on the face of the Earth. It is true that there are other countries that are growing in the manufacturing sector, and it is true that we have lost manufacturing jobs in the United States of America, in large part due to the tax and regulatory burden, things like repatriation and other items which play a role in discouraging economic investment here in the United States, but having said that, we can't forget that the United States still is the number one manufacturer. So with 96 percent of the world's consumers outside of our border, the idea of saying that we're ignoring the President's request--the President stood here. And I will admit, it's with our encouragement, I encouraged him just days after he was elected, Mr. Speaker, with our encouragement he has supported the idea of opening up these markets in Colombia and Panama and South Korea. And I will say, Mr. Speaker, that as we seek to do that, we have embraced these measures and we're doing them in a bipartisan way. And so as my friend got up and said we're talking about ``In God We Trust'' rather than talking about jobs, we do have the ability, believe it or not, to walk and chew gum at the same time. But we all know that the top priority is making sure that we get our economy back on track. And, Mr. Speaker, that is exactly what we're doing. That's exactly what we have done for the past several months. Because in the last Congress, with the passage of things like the stimulus bill that they told us that if we passed the stimulus bill the unemployment rate would not exceed 8 percent, we all know where it is. As I said, in part of my district it's in excess of 15 percent. That has been a failed policy. We have been putting into place policies, again, working in a bipartisan way, unlike the way the stimulus bill was put into place at the beginning of last year. We have now, I believe, established policies that can play a big role to ensuring that those workers whose hands my friend shook in his district are able to have the kind of potential job opportunity that is necessary.

Mr. DREIER. I'm happy, of course, to further yield to my friend, even though he would never yield to me.

Mr. DREIER. If I could reclaim my time, Mr. Speaker, to say that this is not the President's jobs bill--I will admit, it was at our encouragement--but these are things that he said when he addressed us right here in a joint session of Congress. So it is for that reason that we have been able to come together in a bipartisan way to address these very important issues. And so I'm happy, Mr. Speaker, to recognize and support bipartisanship when it comes to getting America working again.

Mr. DREIER

Mr. DREIER. Mr. Speaker, as I listen to my colleagues on both sides of the talk about the imperative of job creation and economic growth, I'd like to recognize a job well done. Forty-four years, 7 months, and 5 days is a long period of time, but that's the tenure of public service provided by our friend, the now Chief Journal Clerk, Trish Madson. She has worked for the Voice of America, the Departments of Agriculture and Transportation. She worked in the Minority Counsel Office under our former minority leader Bob Michel. She is someone I got to know because her late mother was one of my constituents. I would like to ask all of our colleagues to join in giving a round of applause and ovation to Trish Madson, who, after 44 years, 7 months, and 5 days, will be retiring today. Mr. Speaker, I think we've consumed the entire 1 minute just applauding Trish, as it should be.

Mr. DREIER

Mr. DREIER. I thank my friend for yielding. Madam Speaker, it's taken a long time for us to get here. We've had hours and hours of debate, last night and today, and literally years and years and years of discussion and of negotiation, and a lot of anguish and a lot of pain, but we have finally gotten here. I want to begin by expressing my great appreciation to a man with whom I've been pleased to partner in cochairing what has been a longstanding group known as our Trade Working Group. It's sometimes partisan, sometimes bipartisan. It began two decades ago when Bill Archer was chairman of the Ways and Means Committee and Phil Crane chaired the Trade Subcommittee, and with every chairman of the Ways and Means Committee and the Trade Subcommittee, I've been privileged to join with them in working to build these coalitions for the very important goal of breaking down barriers to ensure that we can have access to consumer markets for union and nonunion workers in this country. And this is what it's all about. Dave Camp has done a phenomenal job in negotiating these trade agreements and the issue which is before us today, which is trade adjustment assistance. Now I know that there's a lot of concern about it. I'm frankly not a huge enthusiast, but I recognize that while there is a net gain--a net gain--when it comes to the issue of global trade, there are some workers who are displaced. While some people have been saying that those of us who are enthusiastically supporting the Korea, Panama, and Colombia free trade agreements are greatly exaggerating the positive impact of this, I've got to say that I recognize that there are some people who are going to be going through challenging economic times as a byproduct of this agreement. That's why, as we look at this 21st century economy, it is critically important for us, Madam Speaker, to do everything that we can to ensure that our fellow Americans, U.S. workers, have the kind of training and expertise necessary to deal with this global economy in the 21st century. That's exactly what the Trade Adjustment Assistance package is all about. It's a modest package of $300 million. I know that last night, as he has just informed me, Mr. Camp outlined the details of this to the House. He worked with the chairman of the Senate Finance Committee, Mr. Baucus, and with others to get this to the point where we are. But we are now winding down this debate, and I think about the fact that, when Ronald Reagan on November 6 of 1979 announced his candidacy for President of the United States, in that speech, it was seen as heresy. I mean, it was almost a joke, Madam Speaker. Ronald Reagan said that he envisaged an accord of free trade among the Americas so that we could allow for the free flow of goods and services and capital. He was laughed at here in the United States, and he was laughed at throughout the hemisphere. Madam Speaker, since that time, we have seen tremendous, tremendous changes taking place.

Mr. DREIER. It has been almost 32 years since Ronald Reagan made that announcement; and last Monday, a week ago Monday, on October 3, Democratic President Barack Obama sent these agreements for us to consider, and here we are now doing this. There are so many people who have been involved in this. One of the things that has really impressed me, Madam Speaker, has been the involvement of the 87--now, I guess, 89--new Members on our side of the aisle who have brought about a change in the makeup of this institution. There are people who have stepped to the forefront--Tom Reed, Rick Berg, Tim Griffin, Bob Dold, Quico Canseco, and many others--who have felt strongly about the need to get our economy growing and who know that, in so doing, we will be able to create jobs for U.S. workers.

Mr. DREIER. Let me just close by saying, over that 5-year period of time, Madam Speaker, we have seen so many tremendous changes that have taken place. Five years is half the life for a child who was born on September 11. There have been changes in our economy--and in the global economy--in dealing with issues that weren't even addressed then. The iPad didn't exist 5 years ago when these were put into place. There are issues like encryption, cross-border dataflow, things like intermediary liability, privacy. Those were barely discussed then. Today, these are critical, important issues. This is a very small first step towards regaining our position as the world's global leader. I thank my friend for his support, and I thank all of our colleagues who have been involved in this.

Mr. DREIER

Mr. DREIER. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Rules be permitted to file a supplemental report to accompany House Resolution 425.

Mr. DREIER. Mr. Speaker, by direction of the Committee on Rules, I call up House Resolution 425 and ask for its immediate consideration.

Mr. DREIER. For the purpose of debate only, I yield the customary 30 minutes to my very good friend from Worcester, Massachusetts (Mr. McGovern), pending which I yield myself such time as I may consume. During consideration of this measure, all time yielded will be for debate purposes only. (Mr. DREIER asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.) General Leave

Mr. DREIER. I would also like to ask unanimous consent, Mr. Speaker, that all Members have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks on this resolution.

Mr. DREIER. On November 6 of 1979, Ronald Reagan announced his candidacy for President of the United States. In that speech, he envisaged an accord of free trade among the Americas. He wanted to eliminate all barriers for the free flow of goods and services and products among all of the countries in this hemisphere. On October 3 of 2011, President Obama sent three trade agreements to Capitol Hill for consideration. It has been a long time. I mean, 32 years, I guess, this coming November 6 we will mark the anniversary of President Reagan announcing his candidacy for the Presidency and of which he envisaged this accord. It has been a very, very difficult struggle to get here; but, Mr. Speaker, today marks the first step in this last leg of what, as I said, has been an extraordinarily lengthy journey towards the passage of our three free trade agreements with Colombia, Panama, and South Korea. For 4 years, workers and consumers in the United States and in all three FTA countries have waited for the opportunities that these agreements will create. Republicans and Democrats alike--and let me underscore that again. Republicans and Democrats alike have worked very hard to bring us to this point. We have done so, first and foremost, for the sake of job creation and economic growth. We're regularly hearing discussion on both sides of the aisle about the imperative of creating jobs and getting our economy on track. The President of the United States delivered a speech here to a joint session of Congress in which he talked about the need to pass his jobs bill. Mr. Speaker, this is a very important component of that proposal that the President talked about when he was here. So, as I hear a great deal of discussion about a lack of willingness on Capitol Hill to address the President's jobs bill, it's not an ``all or nothing'' thing. We are taking the very, very important components that the President has proposed addressing. We've worked in a bipartisan way, and this measure before us is evidence of that. As I said, the passage of these agreements will allow us to have an opportunity to create good jobs for union and nonunion Americans who are seeking job opportunities. Together, these agreements will give U.S. workers, businesses, farmers access to $2 trillion of economic activity; and our union and nonunion workers, our farmers and people across this country will have access to 97 million consumers in these three countries. President Obama, in his address here, made it very clear and has said repeatedly that the independent International Trade Commission has said that, in the coming months, we will add a quarter of a million new jobs right here in the United States of America--again, union and nonunion jobs. The independent International Trade Commission has projected that we will see a quarter of a million--250,000--new jobs for our fellow Americans seeking job opportunities. I don't need to explain to anyone in this place why this is so critical for our ailing economy, but those of us who have joined together to finally pass these agreements are working towards something that is even bigger. We are working to restore the bipartisan consensus on the issue of open trade. Eradicating partisan politics from the debate on global economic liberalization and returning to a bipartisan consensus is essential in our quest to move our economy forward. These three agreements are enormously important; but, Mr. Speaker, as you know very well, there is still much work that remains to be done. Now, I understand that the opponents of economic liberalization are very well-intentioned, and I don't fault them. I will say that, as we all know very well, we're in the midst of deeply troubling economic times. It's easy. We all want to look somewhere to point the finger of blame, and trade is a natural target. I mean, I often argue that I still have constituents in southern California who, when they get a hangnail, blame the North American Free Trade Agreement. Trade is a natural target for frustration and anxiety, and we've seen that time and time again. And I know that there are people who believe that passage of these trade agreements which, according to the ITC, would create 250,000 new jobs right here in the United States of America, is, in fact, a bad thing. Trade is the wrong target, Mr. Speaker. The worldwide marketplace, as we all know, is a big, dynamic, and complex operation. It offers tremendous opportunity for those who engage and tremendous peril for those who follow the isolationist path. Those who innovate, who aggressively pursue new ideas and new opportunities are able to compete and succeed. The U.S. has proven this time and time again. The American entrepreneurial spirit has enabled us to not just succeed, but, as we all know, we are the largest, most dynamic economy on the face of the Earth. These agreements will allow us to reaffirm and strengthen that. We all know this, Mr. Speaker: Our country, the United States of America, is the birthplace of Google and Facebook, of Ford and IBM, of Caterpillar and Whirlpool, and of Coca-Cola and eBay. Unfortunately, over the last several years, while the three free trade agreements have languished, the United States of America has stood still. We've let countless opportunities pass us by. We've let our competitors chip away at our market share. If we compete, the United States of America wins. If we compete, we win. But what happens when we take ourselves out of the game, which has been the case for the last several years? We've literally taken ourselves out of the game of breaking down barriers, allowing for the free flow of goods and services and capital. What happens? We lose jobs. We lose market share, and we lose our competitive edge. Now, I'm not going to say that we would not have gone through the terrible economic downturn that we've suffered over the past few years if we had, several years ago, passed these trade agreements. Negotiations began back in 2004 for these agreements. If we had stepped up to the plate, I am absolutely convinced that we would have mitigated the pain and suffering that our fellow Americans are going through with this ailing economy that we have. Getting our economy back on track and reasserting our American leadership role in the worldwide marketplace will require far more than simply passing these free trade agreements, but it's a key and very important step. The agreements will open new markets for workers and job creators here in the United States; and perhaps even more important, it will send a signal to the world that the United States of America is back open for business. The United States of America is once again choosing to shape the global marketplace rather than to allow ourselves to be shaped by it. Because, Mr. Speaker, if we don't shape the global marketplace, we will continue to be shaped by that global marketplace. We will also send a very powerful message to our allies that the United States of America is living up to its commitments. Now, Mr. Speaker, it is utterly shameful that we have forced three close friends of the United States--two of our own neighbors right here in the Americas and one in an extraordinarily strategic region--to wait for 4 long years. It is shameful that we have forced these friends and allies, who negotiated in good faith with us for these agreements, to wait as long as they have. One of the things we've observed is that the world has taken note. Our would-be negotiators--not only on trade agreements but on other issues as well--our would-be trade partners and negotiating partners, as I said, on issues beyond trade have taken note. I don't believe that our credibility will be immediately restored with the passage of these free trade agreements, but we will at least begin the process. We will begin the process of demonstrating credibility on the part of the United States. We will signal that the U.S. is recommitting itself to its partnerships, that our word at the negotiating table can be trusted. Very sadly, over the past several years, our partners could come to no other conclusion than that our word cannot be trusted at the negotiating table because of action that was taken here a few years ago, rejecting an opportunity for consideration of these agreements. Mr. Speaker, this rule puts in place a lengthy debate process, during which the tremendous economic and geopolitical benefits of these three trade agreements will be discussed, and the misinformation surrounding these agreements will be able to be refuted. That's why I think this is a very important debate. It's vitally important that we have this debate so that the facts can get on the table and the ability to refute specious arguments can be put forward. And that's what's going to happen this evening and tomorrow leading up to the votes that we are going to cast. This rule provides also for the consideration of Trade Adjustment Assistance, a modest program that has helped to build that bipartisan consensus that I have been talking about and I believe is essential to our economic recovery. Now, I don't believe that the TAA program is perfect. Meaningful reforms have been incorporated. And most important, Mr. Speaker, the passage of Trade Adjustment Assistance will, in turn, help us not just pass the FTAs, but it will help us maintain what I have had as a goal going back two decades ago when we put together a trade working group that has had bipartisan participation. It will allow us to rebuild the bipartisan consensus that I think is so important. That will send a powerful message to the markets, to job creators, to workers in this country, to Americans who are seeking job opportunities, and it will send a very important message to our allies and we hope future allies throughout this world. So, Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to come together in a strong bipartisan way and support the rule that will allow us to have a very, very rigorous debate on the underlying agreements and Trade Adjustment Assistance. With that, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. DREIER. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself 30 seconds to say that Colombia has gone through incredible tragedy over the past several years. It has been absolutely horrible. And the suffering that my colleague from Worcester has just shown is very, very disturbing. But I think we should note that we have seen an 85 percent decline in the murder rate. In fact, there are cities in this country that have a higher murder rate than exist in Colombia today.

Mr. DREIER. I yield myself an additional 15 seconds, Mr. Speaker. We also should make it very, very clear that it is safer to be a union member and union leader in Colombia because of the protection that's provided by the government than to be the average citizen. Let's solidify those gains, and that's exactly what these agreements will do. With that, I am happy to yield 2 minutes to a very, very thoughtful individual committed to the trade agenda, my good friend from Hinsdale, Illinois (Mrs. Biggert).

Mr. DREIER. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself 15 seconds to say that free trade is fair trade. And it's interesting to note that the United Auto Workers supports the agreement that exists. I totally concur with my friend from Rochester in arguing, Mr. Speaker, that we must enforce the agreements that we have, including on intellectual property issues. With that, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. DREIER. Mr. Speaker, I am happy to yield 2 minutes to one of our thoughtful, hardworking new Members, the gentleman from Fowler, Kansas (Mr. Huelskamp).

Mr. DREIER. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself 30 seconds to say to my friend that we have been debating this issue since the negotiations began in 2004. Time and time again on this House floor, we've had very rigorous debates on these agreements. And I will acknowledge, we do have problems with job creation and economic growth. What this measure does, Mr. Speaker, is it eliminates the barrier for union and nonunion workers and farmers in this country to have access to new markets.

Mr. DREIER. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself 1 minute to say that we are going to respond to some of these arguments that have been made. First, Colombia is not the safest place in the world. I'm the first to acknowledge that. There are terrible, terrible problems there. We've been dealing with the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia, the FARC, the paramilitaries, and serious, serious problems that have existed in Colombia. No one is trying to whitewash or dismiss the serious challenges that exist there. But it's important to note that nearly 2,000 labor leaders in Colombia, Mr. Speaker, have around-the- clock bodyguards protecting them. And in Colombia, it is safer to be a unionist than it is the average citizen. So I'm not saying that things are perfect. No one is making that claim. But when we've seen an 85 percent decrease in the murder rate since 2002, when we've seen more murders take place--tragically--in some of our cities than have taken place in some areas of Colombia, that is something that has to be seen as progress.

Mr. DREIER. I yield myself an additional 15 seconds, Mr. Speaker, to say that I believe we can, in a bipartisan way, work to address these very important issues. And we are going to do just that. We are going to ensure that this kind of agreement effectively addresses these problems. My friend, Mr. Farr, and I have sat together in the Office of the Fiscalia in Colombia, in Bogota.