William Roth

Mr. ROTH

Mr. ROTH. I move to reconsider the vote.

Mr. ROTH. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that we dispense with the 2 minutes before each of the other amendments on both sides.

Mr. ROTH. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that on the three remaining stacked votes, they be limited to 10 minutes.

Mr. ROTH. Mr. President, I move to reconsider the vote.

Mr. ROTH. Reserving the right to object, I think the hope is that we will set the vote aside and have several votes later.

Mr. ROTH. We join the Senator in asking for the yeas and nays.

Mr. ROTH. I suggest to the Senator from Colorado that I will make a few comments.

Mr. ROTH. Mr. President, the Senator yields his and I yield mine. I yield the 2 minutes.

Mr. ROTH. Mr. President, I ask for the yeas and nays on the Smith amendment.

Mr. ROTH. In the meantime, let the Senator from California proceed.

Mr. ROTH. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the following Senators be permitted to speak for up to the designated times in the following order: Senator Kyl, 5 minutes; Senator Biden, 10 minutes; Senator Torricelli, 10 minutes; Senator Hutchison, 10 minutes; Senator Gramm, 10 minutes; Senator Thompson, 10 minutes; Senator Roth, 5 minutes. I further ask consent that the vote occur no later than 1:45 p.m. this afternoon.

Mr. ROTH. Reserving the right to object, I must say we have agreed that we would have the vote at quarter of 2. If there is any time left that I have allotted, I will yield it. It looks to me as if I am not going to have any time.

Mr. ROTH. I ask the distinguished Senator--I regret the situation has developed this way, but we have a number of Senators who are leaving so we have fixed a time for the vote specifically at quarter of 2.

Mr. ROTH. I have to object to the request, with all due deference.

Mr. ROTH. I object.

Mr. ROTH. Parliamentary inquiry: Is that correct?

Mr. ROTH. I ask the Senator from Tennessee to please proceed.

Mr. ROTH. Let me say to the distinguished Senator, I am yielding my 5 minutes. I am not speaking.

Mr. ROTH. All right. We will let the Senator from Ohio have--what is it, 2 minutes?

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

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 President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded.

Mr. ROTH. Mr. President, I rise in opposition to this proposal offered by my distinguished colleague from New Hampshire. I must do so because its passage will endanger H.R. 4444, not because of the sentiments expressed in the proposal. As the State Department Human Rights Report of 1999 states, in recent years there have been credible reports that organs from executed prisoners in China were removed, sold, and transplanted. Chinese officials have even confirmed that executed prisoners are among the source of organs for transplant. Of course, they maintain that they get the consent of prisoners or their relatives before organs are removed. Needless to say, China's organ harvesting practices are as gruesome as they are indefensible. But ending trade with China is unlikely to force the Chinese to change their behavior in this area. Indeed, by opening China to trade and to global standards of economic behavior we may well prod China to abandon its practices regarding organ harvesting. Let us remember as well that H.R. 4444 establishes a congressional- executive commission on China which I believe holds promise for pressuring China to curb its human rights abuses, including the grotesque practice of harvesting organs. Therefore, Mr. President, I must urge my colleagues to vote against this proposal. Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.

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

Mr. ROTH

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

Mr. ROTH. Mr. President, I yield myself such time as I may use. Mr. President, I rise in opposition to Senator Byrd's amendment regarding safeguards. I do so even though I share my colleague's concern regarding the President's utter disregard for statutory deadlines in our trade remedy laws. The President's failure to issue timely decisions in recent section 201 cases was simply unacceptable. Also unacceptable is the President's failure to meet the deadline set for modifying the retaliation list in the bananas dispute at the WTO. This pattern of utter disregard for statutory deadlines simply must stop. With that said, I must still oppose this amendment for both substantive and procedural reasons. With regard to substance, it is vitally important for the Finance Committee to be given the opportunity to consider this proposal before it is adopted into law. As I noted yesterday, there are serious flaws in this amendment that could make it unworkable in certain circumstances. It would be reckless to adopt such a significant change to our trade laws without adequate review, particularly given the flaws that are already apparent in what my good friend has proposed. I am also concerned that we are isolating the Chinese for differential treatment through this proposal. The agreement may not be inconsistent with the U.S.-China bilateral agreement, but it does create a procedure that differs sharply from our other trade remedy programs. I must also oppose the amendment because of the potential impact that this amendment will have on the passage of PNTR. In my view, a vote for any amendment, including this one, is a vote to kill PNTR. Mr. President, such a result would be devastating for our workers and farmers. That is why I urge my colleagues to vote against my good friend's amendment. I yield the floor and suggest the absence of a quorum.