Bill Thomas

Mr. THOMAS

Mr. THOMAS. Well, gee, Mr. Speaker, I guess I am a little bit confused. Apparently the gentleman from Washington thinks that President Bush negotiated this agreement. Perhaps I should shock him into reality and indicate that the proper response on this floor should have been shame on you. Shame on your administration in trying to push your domestic trade agenda by making an offer to Jordan you knew they could not refuse. What kind of diplomatic relationship is that? The mistake of using Jordan as a pawn has partially been corrected by the exchange of letters. And so when my colleague stands up here and says piously, gee, we are trying to reverse an agreement in which we just want some standards for labor and the environment, I would note, as I said at the very beginning, there is nothing wrong with that. We need to move in that direction. Get over it. The previous administration tried to sneak an agreement through, and it was not done. Now, let us sit down and work together and talk about not using antiquated sanctions in resolving these new issues. The bottom line is this, Mr. Speaker. This agreement is on the suspension calendar. We all agree that our friend and ally is long overdue this recognition. Let us vote ``yes'' on H.R. 2603.

Mr. THOMAS. Mr. Speaker, it is my pleasure to yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Kolbe), who through his time and talent has assisted for a long time. I look forward to working with him as we move trade promotion authority.

Mr. THOMAS. Mr. Speaker, it is my pleasure to yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Cantor).

Mr. THOMAS. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time.

Mr. THOMAS. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, first of all I want to thank the chairman of the Committee on the Judiciary, the gentleman from Wisconsin (Chairman Sensenbrenner), for their willingness to expedite this process. As you know, many committees share jurisdiction over issues; and on this particular piece of legislation, notwithstanding the Committee on the Judiciary's jurisdictional prerogative, they were willing to exchange letters with us so that we might move forward. As Chair of the Committee on Ways and Means, I include these letters for the record and thank the gentleman from Wisconsin (Chairman Sensenbrenner). Committee on Ways and Means, Washington, DC, July 30, 2001. Hon. F. James Sensenbrenner, Jr., Chairman, House of Representatives, Rayburn House Office Building, Washington, DC. Dear Jim: Thank you for your letter regarding H.R. 2603, the ``United States-Jordan Free Trade Area Implementation Act of 2001.'' As you have noted, the Committee on Ways and Means ordered favorably reported, H.R. 2603, ``United States-Jordan Free Trade Area Implementation Act of 2001,'' on Thursday, July 26, 2001. I appreciate your agreement to expedite the passage of this legislation despite containing provisions within your Committee's jurisdiction. I acknowledge your decision to forego further action on the bill was based on the understanding that it will not prejudice the Committee on the Judiciary with respect to its jurisdictional prerogatives or the appointment of conferees on this or similar legislation. Finally, I will include in the Congressional Record a copy of our exchange of letters on this matter. Thank you for your assistance and cooperation. We look forward to working with you in the future. Best regards, Bill Thomas, Chairman.

Mr. THOMAS. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. I would say to the gentleman the only unfortunate circumstance in this agreement was the unfortunate consequences of taking advantage to push a domestic agenda on trade with as important and vital a strategic partner as Jordan. We would have preferred that this domestic agenda on trade be done in a slightly different way. The letters, in fact, go a long way toward correcting that attempt, to grab the initiative on a domestic agenda on trade by using this agreement. Mr. Speaker, it is my pleasure to yield 2\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from California (Mr. Dreier), one of the leading advocates and spokesmen for trade in the House of Representatives and the chairman of the Committee on Rules.

Mr. THOMAS. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 2603) to implement the agreement establishing a United States-Jordan free trade area, as amended.

Mr. THOMAS. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I can understand the perplexity of my friends on the other side over the letters in which they say the letters were not Jordan's idea. Well, let us return to the negotiation between the Clinton administration and the Jordanians. I cannot believe it was the Jordanians' idea to lay on the table old- fashioned sanctions in which products are used to retaliate against violations extended to labor and the environment. I have a hunch it was the Clinton administration that laid these on the table. And, of course, my friend from Michigan then says, they did not object to them. Of course they are not going to object to them. They are going to say, yes, to whatever is laid on the table. So I do not think the argument about basic standards being implemented is the issue. It was the fact that the Jordanians were required to agree to a sanctions structure that was imposed upon them by the Clinton administration. The letters were not Jordan's idea, but the basic document was not Jordan's idea either. What we have is an ability to reach agreement and move forward. Frankly, we would not be here today without the letters. So I think the letters were a very good thing. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. English), a member of the Committee on Ways and Means.

Mr. THOMAS. Mr. Speaker, it is my pleasure to yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Knollenberg).

Mr. THOMAS

Mr. THOMAS. Mr. Speaker, I was unavoidably detained during rollcall No. 288. Had I been present I would have voted ``no.'' Amendment No. 46 offered by Mr. Menendez

Mr. THOMAS

Mr. THOMAS. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, there is no question, given the tragic history of the relationship in recent decades between the United States and Vietnam, that there would not be strong personal feelings. We have to approach this legislation looking at it on the whole but, because of that, Mr. Speaker, I would like to serve notice that at the end of the debate, we intend to ask for a recorded vote so that all Members may express their own particular position on this issue. As the gentleman from Michigan indicated, he has a concern beyond a bilateral trade agreement with the Government of the United States and Vietnam; and I want to indicate to him that I look forward to exploring with him and other Members of Congress the appropriateness of negotiating an incentive-based textile and apparel agreement with Vietnam, which I believe will begin to address the very concerns that the gentleman from California (Mr. Rohrabacher), my friend and colleague, indicated about the fact that if, in fact, there is going to be economic progress in Vietnam on the basis of American investment and involvement, that the Vietnamese people themselves also benefit. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from Illinois (Mrs. Biggert), but prior to that, I ask unanimous consent to yield the balance of my time to the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Crane) and that he control the balance of the time.

Mr. THOMAS. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong opposition to House Joint Resolution 55 and, therefore, in support of extending Vietnam's Jackson-Vanik waiver. I believe this waiver represents the best hope for continued political and economic reform in Vietnam and, therefore, greater market access for American companies in one of Southeast Asia's most important emerging economies. These three key issues come to bear on this question: Has Vietnam made progress in emigration? Have we continued despite great difficulty improving and committing ourselves to accounting for our servicemen still missing in action? And on free and equal access to trade and investment opportunities for American companies? In each case, I believe the answer is yes. As we enter a new decade of bilateral cooperation, efforts to normalize relationships on both sides are bearing fruit. Mr. Speaker, I was part of the first trade delegation ever to go to Vietnam under the leadership of then chairman of the Subcommittee on Trade Mr. Gibbons of Florida. We ventured to Hanoi and to Ho Chi Minh City. Although conditions, especially in the north of Vietnam, were relatively bleak, even at that time you could see the potential of then more than 75 million individuals who had an extremely high literacy rate and who seemed to be more than willing to work hard. The thing that struck me the most was the fact that there was an enormous number of foreigners in the country working on various trade arrangements. What was most striking is that virtually none of them were American. It was a clear indication that Vietnam, notwithstanding the difficulties we have with the government structure and notwithstanding the concerns that many of us have about the complete ability to account for our servicemen and women missing in action, that the United States if we continued our then current position was going to miss out; miss out not only in terms of economic opportunities but miss out in shaping this country which I believe will have a significant and positive impact in Southeast Asia. Promoting emigration is at the core of the Jackson-Vanik structure. Vietnam, I believe, has taken significant steps to liberalize its emigration practices. Among other achievements, it has cleared for interview all but 73 of the nearly 21,000 individuals who have applied for consideration under the Resettlement Opportunity for Vietnamese Returnees program. In addition to that, we really believe that the continued improvement in this area of human rights depends upon extending the Jackson-Vanik waiver, to let us positively influence the direction of Vietnam's economic and political future. We in addition to this Jackson-Vanik waiver will today in the Committee on Ways and Means be considering a bilateral trade agreement between Vietnam and the United States. That will afford us further opportunities both as trading partners and a growing relationship which will eventually hopefully move to a strong friendship, a remembrance of our past relationships with a commitment to make sure in Southeast Asia this does not occur, because frankly I believe that Vietnam will be one of the key nations in Southeast Asia as it continues to grow in its trade relationships around the world. We saw with Thailand in 1997 how one country's instability can quickly spread to others. I believe over the next several decades, Vietnam can be an anchor for economic improvement in Southeast Asia but probably more important a laboratory in how we can move toward a more democratic structure in a regime that currently cannot be determined to be democratic. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. THOMAS. Mr. Speaker, pursuant to the previous order of the House, I call up the joint resolution (H.J. Res. 55) disapproving the extension of the waiver authority contained in section 402(c) of the Trade Act of 1974 with respect to Vietnam, and ask for its immediate consideration.

Mr. THOMAS. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to yield one-half of my time to the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Levin) the ranking member of the Subcommittee on Trade of the Committee on Ways and Means and that he be permitted to yield the time as he sees fit.

Mr. THOMAS

Mr. THOMAS. Mr. Speaker, I am in receipt of a letter dated July 24 addressed to me as chairman of the Committee on Ways and Means signed by the Speaker of the House. The letter says that ``If the President submits a report, pursuant to the `ILSA Extension Act of 2001' that contains a recommendation stating that the Iran-Libya Sanctions Act should be terminated or modified, and if a bill is introduced that would terminate or modify ILSA, as recommended by the President, within 60 legislative days of the filing of the President's report, then I will use my authority under Rule XII, clause 2(c)(5) to place a time limit of not more than 45 days on all committees to which such legislation is referred.'' Mr. Speaker, I include for the Record the letter just referenced. Washington, DC, July 24, 2001. Hon. William M. Thomas, Chairman, Committee on Ways and Means, Longworth House Office Building, Washington, DC. Dear Mr. Chairman: Pursuant to Rule XII, clause 2(c)(5), the Speaker may subject the referral of a bill to a committee of primary jurisdiction to appropriate time limitations. If the President submits a report pursuant to the ``ILSA Extension Act of 2001'' that contains a recommendation stating that the Iran and Libya Sanctions Act (``ILSA'') should be terminated or modified, and if a bill is introduced that would terminate or modify ILSA, as recommended by the President, within sixty legislative days of the filing of the President's report, then I will use my authority under Rule XII, clause 2(c)(5) to place a time limit of not more than forty-five days on all Committees to which such legislation is referred. Sincerely, J. Dennis Hastert, Speaker of the House.

Mr. THOMAS

Mr. THOMAS. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material on H.J. Res. 55, the joint resolution just passed.

Mr. THOMAS

Mr. THOMAS. If the gentleman will continue to yield, I want to thank the gentleman very much for his interest in this issue, but most importantly his courtesy in not moving forward.

Mr. THOMAS. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding time to me. I understand his concern about this proposed regulation. However, I do want to underscore that all of the gentleman's comments are in anticipation of this regulation being approved. It is in fact in the process of being reviewed. It was presented in the last few hours of the Clinton administration, and the Bush administration is examining it. I do believe it may have the unfortunate consequence that the gentleman from Florida has indicated, and that is that a wholly unnecessary flight of capital, not just out of Florida but out of the United States, at a time when obviously people are looking to this country; notwithstanding our current economic concerns, they are still placing enormous amounts of capital in this country because of a reasonable return and primarily because of the security or low risk. We ought not to rock that boat unnecessarily. I rise in concern on this amendment to the Postal Treasury bill because it is an amendment prohibiting monies being spent on a proposed regulation; and I do believe that is fraught, if in fact this practice were to become popular, with really completely disrupting the rulemaking process in the administrative branch. Because the language says no money can be used, how do we then collect the data to make an informed decision on whether the rule should go forward or not. The gentleman from Florida does not want the rule to go forward, but that is in this particular instance. Therefore, I rise, one, to respond to his concerns about the potential problematic aspect of this proposed regulation, but, more importantly, to offer, because the Ways and Means has jurisdiction over this material, my office and potential hearing, but especially to get Treasury together with those particular interests and make sure that there is a complete understanding of the consequences of this regulation, if it goes forward. Notwithstanding that effort, if it goes forward, I can assure the gentleman that there will be hearings on what would then be the completed regulation; and if in fact we did not get significant changes, we would then very well be moving legislation. That I believe would be the appropriate way to deal with this potentially vexing rule that is in the examination process in Treasury. This amendment, although I know well-intentioned, really has, in the chairman's opinion, ramifications far beyond this one particular issue.

Mr. THOMAS. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?

Mr. THOMAS

Mr. THOMAS. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Ways and Means be discharged from further consideration of the Senate bill (S. 1190) to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to rename the education individual retirement accounts as the Coverdell education savings accounts, and ask for its immediate consideration in the House.

Mr. THOMAS

Mr. THOMAS. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that the remainder of my time be controlled by the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Crane).

Mr. THOMAS. Mr. Speaker, pursuant to the unanimous consent agreement of July 17, I call up the joint resolution (H.J. Res. 50) disapproving the extension of the waiver authority contained in section 402(c) of the Trade Act of 1974 with respect to the People's Republic of China, and ask for its immediate consideration.

Mr. THOMAS. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to yield one-half of the time, 30 minutes, to the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Levin), the ranking member on the Subcommittee on Trade of the Committee on Ways and Means, and that he be permitted to yield time as he sees fit.

Mr. THOMAS. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume, and I rise in strong opposition to House Joint Resolution 50, which would cut off normal trade relations with China. This resolution, I believe, is terribly short-sighted toward Chinese reform and hard-fought gains of American consumers, workers and exporters, given how China is so close to accepting the comprehensive trade disciplines of the World Trade Organization membership. Just last July, this body voted 273 to 197 to extend normal permanent trade relations to China upon its accession to the WTO. The reason this measure is in front of us today is that, after negotiations between Ambassador Zoellick and the Republic of China, we have come to an agreement on a bilateral agreement which is a precursor to the admission of China. Unfortunately, the date sequences leave us with an open period of time in which this annual renewal is necessary. In order to support the United States government's decision based upon the bilateral negotiated treaty with China, I urge all Members to oppose H.J. Res. 50. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong opposition to H.J. Res. 50, which would cut-off normal trade relations with China. This resolution is terribly short-sighted toward Chinese reforms and the hard-fought gains of American consumers, workers, and exporters, given how close China is to accepting the comprehensive trade disciplines of WTO membership. Last July, this body voted 273 to 197 to extend permanent normal trade relations with China upon its accession to the WTO. I expect China to officially assume the full responsibilities of WTO membership by year end. Defeat of H.J. 50 is necessary to support Ambassador's Zoellick's decision to take the extra time to ensure that China's concessions to the Untied States are as clear and as expansive as possible. Despite its history, despite having been pushed and pulled between colonialism and nationalism, ravaged by simultaneous imperial invasion and civil war, and finally driven to near ruin by Mao and his Cultural Revolution, China is finally prepared to join the world of trading nations by accepting the fair trade rules of the WTO. This is progress that must be supported. While the world and the Chinese people still face overwhelming problems with the behavior of the Chinese government, it is imperative to understand that China is changing. These last ten years represent the most stable and industrious decade China has known in the last 150 years. WTO Membership and normal trade relations with the United States is the best tool we have to support the changes we see in China. Thanks to the Chinese government's structural economic reforms, more than 40 percent of China's current industrial output now comes from private firms. Urban incomes in China have more than doubled. For millions of Chinese, increased prosperity and well-being has been manifest in the form of improved diets and purchases of consumer goods. Everyday, more and more ordinary Chinese citizens are able to start their own businesses and begin the process of building an entirely new way of life for themselves. We are witnessing Chinese society renew itself, absorbing new ideas and a world of information and knowledge. As well, the Beijing Government is taking steps to integrate capitalists into China's domestic political system. Revoking NTR at this time would undermine the success of the capitalist and social reforms taking place in China. Let us not turn our backs on the gains our negotiators have made with China for America's farmers, businesses, and consumers. Instead, let us all give capitalism a true chance in China. I urge a ``no'' vote on H.J. Res. 50. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. THOMAS

Mr. THOMAS. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material on House Joint Resolution 50.