achievement in colombia in 50 years. with that, i yield a minute to the distinguished gentleman from florida, mr. diaz-balart. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognize. mr. diaz-balart: i want to thank chairman camp not only for that great explanation he did but for bringing this bill to the floor. i keep hearing a lot about the horrors of colombia. a couple of facts. because of the trade pact renchable act, colombian goods that come to the united states already basically come almost tariff free this would even it out so our products, created by american labor here, can go to colombia with the same preferential treatment. fact numb one. fact number two, the chairman talked about this, i keep hearing about this colombia which is really frankly a caricature, an offensive caricature of what colombia really is. . as if we can throw these things out there, pretending it doesn't mean anything.

colombia is a democratic ally, mr. speaker. they have taken incredible steps to move forward to lower violence, to lower crime, to lower narcotrafficking. they are even now training police forces across the world, including mexico, in their fight against narcoterrorism. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. mr. camp: an additional 30 seconds. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. diaz-balart: a democratic ally, a place that is fighting for democracy and for freedom and due process and the rule of law, we should recognize it, commend them, thank them for being such an ally. for being a democracy. mr. speaker, isn't it ironic a lot of people that want to do business with castro's cuba where labor unions aren't permitted complain about colombia because they are a democracy, because they are an ally, because they are doing the right thing. let's pass this commonsense thing. let's also thank the president for finally doing what he said

he was going to do a long time ago when he said it was time to pass this. it's better late than never, mr. president. thank you for finally sending it. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. does the gentleman from michigan seek recognition? mr. levin: i do. it's my privilege to yield one minute to our distinguished leader, the gentlelady from california, ms. pelosi. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman from california is recognized for one minute. ms. pelosi: thank you very much, mr. speaker. i thank the gentleman for yielding and thank him for his great leadership on protecting american workers while promoting the global economy which we are proudly a part of. mr. speaker, i rise today as we consider the colombia free trade agreement to make the following statement. much has been said about this agreement creating 6,000 jobs in the united states. 6,000 jobs.

now, we want to fight for every single job for the american people, but it is ironic or strange to hear a big fuss about we have to do this because it's going to create 6,000 jobs when this, the leadership of this body is totally ignoring the fact that we are losing one million jobs, one million jobs because of the china currency bill. when it was discussed that these bills would be brought to the floor, many of us said we shouldn't even be considering these bills. 6,000 for colombia, perhaps 70,000 for korea, maybe 1,000 for panama. 77,000 jobs, that's significant. if in fact those numbers really bear out. let's assume they do for a moment. we are making a big deal out of 77,000 jobs which are a big

deal, but how much bigger a deal is it to say we are ignoring the fact that we are losing over one million jobs per year because of the china man national park plays of their currency? the distinguished speaker has said if we push this bill, we will start a trade war with china. my, have i heard that song before. many of us have been fighting for a better relationship with china in terms of our trade relationship, and for at least two decades we have been fighting for opening of our markets to china to stop the piracy of our intellectual property, the list goes on. but this manipulation of currency, ok, the speaker says we are going to start a trade war, 20 years ago when we started this debate following

tiananmen square, our trade deficit with china was $5 billion a year. we tried to use our leverage with most favored nation status to get the chinese to open their markets, stopping pirating intellectual property, etc. and everybody said if you do that you will start a trade war. just let the national course of events -- natural course of events take place. well, we didn't start a trade war, but do you know what china's surplus with the united states is today? what our deficit is with china? $5 billion a year two decades -- 20 years ago when we fought this fight and lost, it's now $5 billion per week. over, more than $5 trillion a week. over a quarter of a trillion dollars in surplus does the

chinese government enjoy in their relationship with the united states. so you're telling me that if we say we want you to act fairly in terms of your currency that they are going to give up a quarter of a trillion dollars in surplus? much bigger export to the united states, but in surplus. this man national park plays of currency is a subsidy of the chinese government for their product. by subsidizing their exports, they make it uncompetitive for us not only in the u.s.-china bilateral trade relationship, but also in the global marketplace. where we have to compete, our exports have to compete with china's exports and they have subsidized their exports on the man national park plays of about 25% -- on the manipulation of about 25% on the currency.

this is not fair, a million u.s. jobs. so when our colleagues make a fuss about 6,000, every one of them is precious to us, yes. but why are we missing in action when it comes to a million jobs, if 6,000 jobs are so important? i agree they are. last night in the senate they passed this legislation, they passed legislation to take action if china continues to man niche plate their currency -- manipulate their currency. we shouldn't even be talking about any trade bills until we do the same. they are not voting on china -- excuse me, on colombia, korea, and panama before they voted on china. they did that. they made their -- they staked their claim for the american workers. the speaker says we are going to start a trade war. the chinese government started a war with america's manufacturing sector a long time ago.

they undervalued their currency as i have said, they violated intellectual property rights, they subsidized target industries, they dumped our products into our country. this is a one way street to the disadvantage of american workers. look, many of us when we grew up we dug a hole in the sand at the beach and we said we were going to reach china if we dig, we were digging far enough. we dug far enough. it's a country we want to have a brilliant relationship with, culturally, economically, politically, and every possible way. economically, too. but when are we going to call a halt to something that is so obvious? we are talking about not an 800-gound gorilla, an eight ton gorilla lying on the floor of this house that we want to ignore so we can talk about

6,000 jobs and 70,000 jobs which are important. i don't want to minimize that. but why are you minimizing a million jobs at least that would be affected? it's funny to me because when we were having the fight on most favored nation status for china, we were winning, we just couldn't override the presidential vetoes. and so they had to change the name. you have heard the expression pntr, do you know what that means? it went from most favored nation, which they said that sounds -- we can't win that argument, to permanent, permanent normal trade relations . you know what that means? surrender all your leverage in the trade relationship. surrender. this is a permanent -- permanent normal trade relations. so when specific things come up like manipulation of currency, by the way other asian economies peg their currency to china's currency, so we are getting an

onslaught of this, is really, really important for us to say, who are we here for? who are we representing? we have a make it in america agenda to grow and to strengthen our industrial and manufacturing base in our country. exports are essential to our success economically. small businesses are essential to the success of our economy. small businesses want to export as well, but why are we saying to small businesspeople, to our industrial workers, to our manufacturing base, you are now going to go into an arena which we have subscribed to that makes it -- you engage in unfair -- an unfair relationship because we will not speak out against this manipulation of currency. 61 republicans are co-sponsors

of the bill, it has bipartisan support. the senate has passed the bill overwhelmingly with bipartisan support. they took it up first as a premise, planting a flag, staking a claim for the american worker before they went on to consider other trade agreements. why can't we do that in the house? i think we should call a halt to voting on any of these things until we say to the american worker we are on your side, we are on your side when it comes to these trade agreements. we recognize that trade is very important to us. president kennedy is part of the legacy of all of us here talking about america as important in the world economy and free trade, fair trade i'd like to think as part of that. but after 20 years of violation of our intellectual property, subsidizing their products, the

list goes on and on. we just sit by and say we are going to start a trade war if we do something about the war on america's manufactures that the chinese already have done. remember 20 years ago the -- they made the same claims, $5 billion a year. how did that work out for us? today, $5 billion a week at least. so the chinese are going to walk away from a quarter of a trillion dollars in profits? i don't think so. let's stop riding that tiger. let's do the right thing for our workers. let's not even consider any of these trade agreements. since we are talking about colombia i want to say the following. i really wanted very much to be able to vote for this legislation. i was very hopeful when the two governments, colombia and the u.s., negotiated the

u.s.-colombian action plan related to labor rights. they addressed labor concerns and to start the process of ending the abuses. but the commitments made -- but that didn't happen. the administration was advocating for this, but the leadership in the congress said no. and the leadership in this house said no. we are not going to put in language in the bill of a language that the two governments negotiated to address the labor concerns. if it's not in the bill, it doesn't exist. if we are going to implement these -- this action plan, it has to be part of the legislation. or else we are just saying, it's an incidental. it's something on the side. that's not fair to the workers in colombia or to the workers in the united states. so when the commitment made by -- our government and colombia

to each other was not included in the bill, i lost my faith in the legislation. i hope that today we can get a vote on china, manipulation of currency, get a colombia free trade agreement that can work for colombian workers and u.s. workers and get a trade policy that recognizes that it's a competitive world. we intend to be number one. we intend to be innovative. we intend to educate our work force so that we are -- our entrepreneurial spirit can prevail. it could be a very exciting time. something new, something fresh, instead of we are diverting to the same old, same old ways. i urge my colleagues to urge the leadership of this house to take up the china currency bill before we consider any other trade bills and yield back the

balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady's time has expired. the gentleman from michigan. mr. camp: thank you, mr. speaker. at this time i yield three minutes to the lead chief democrat co-sponsor of the bill we are considering today, the colombian trade promotion agreement, mr. farr from california. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from california, mr. farr, is recognized for three minutes. mr. farr: i ask unanimous consent to revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. farr: thank you very much, mr. speaker. . mr. farr: thank you so much, mr. speaker, thank you for yielding. colombia is an important country to us. it has incredible potential. colombia is a big country, the 20th largest trade partner with the united states, it's our best ally in latin america, the first country to accept peace corps, allowed an air force base to be built in colombia, other cupries haven't allowed that. they are now fighting alongside us in afghanistan, help us with mexico and the drug cartels by

teaching the mexican national police and military how to handle those drug cartels. it's the first country to adopt a labor action plan. let me speak to that. that labor action plan was adopted this year, april 11. you'll hear a lot of complaints, it hasn't moved fast enough. it's already organized deprosers into youngs in six months. it's the stroppingest labor plan ever adopted in the history of the united states trade agreements. that's not my opinion, that's the preponderance of the secretary of labor of this country, it's the opinion of the congressional research office and frankly a lot of people say, this is another and a half tasm it's not nafta. nafta didn't have the i.l.o. declaration on fundamental principles and rights at work and the followup provisions. this is the peru free trade agreement we passed that has that, right here, under article 17. s the colombian free trade

agrement, exactly the same, the principles are the same, number two reads effective recognition of the right to collective bargaining. effective recognition. that means anything that stops that can be brought under this agreement and action against the country. so look, you'll hear arguments today that it's a loss of jobs. it's going to be a loss of jobs if we don't do this. we have made a free trade agreement wever single country in latin america except colombia, panama, and ecuador. these will be the strongest. but if we don't lift those trade barriers, all the products we send to colombia have a tariff on them. all those other countries, don't. all those other countries entering into ageements don't have it, canada doesn't have it. we're going to lose jobs to people who make things there and send them here pause it's going to be too expensive to buy them. we don't want to lose jobs, we

want to grow more jobs. there's a great market in colombia to d that. say say union workers are not protected, not aloud to organize. the only country that counts crimes against labor union is is clomyasm it's the only country that set up ministry to have prosecute those crimes. you say they haven't prossculetted enough, but some of those happened in the 1960's, 1970's, they worked it out with the unions, a lot of unions are in support of the free trade agreement because of the labor standards we required them to adopt. i submit to you, mr. chairman, that the provisions in this colombian free trade agreements are the longest -- strongest labor provisions in any free trade agreement. mr. camp: i yield the gentleman an additional 15 seconds. mr. farr: if we're going to encourage progress, we're

investing in colombia, we have peace corps volunteers in colombia, if we are going to encourage growth in u.s. industries if we're going to deal we this culture of poverty, we have to encourage a strong future for both countries. the only way to do that is to ensure the adoption of this agreement. the speaker pro tempore: the time of the gentleman from california has expired. for what purpose does the gentleman from michigan, mr. levin, rise? mr. levin: i now yield to another member of our committee, mr. thompson, two minutes. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for two minutes. mr. thompson: i thank the gentleman for yielding me time. i rise in opposition to the colombian trade bill. trade agreements must be balanced, facilitating reciprocal, two-way trade between nations. it's necessary that we also take into consideration small family-owned domestic industries that are sensitive to cheap foreign imports.

unfortunately, the colombia trade bill falls flat in accomplishing these goals. for more than 20 years, colombia has benefited from the duty-free eaksessdz to the u.s. market under the andean trade preferences act. at the same time, some colombia industries have received big government subsidies from the colombian government and often time our own u.s. foreign aid dollars fall to them, benefiting them. these policies have slowly eroded one of california east most unique and innovative industries. california is home to the vast majority of domestic cut flower growers in the united states of america. they account for more than 10,000 jobs across our state. and represent hundreds of millions of dollars in economic activity every year. because of these failed trade policies, colombia now has a strangleholded on 75% of the u.s. cut now every market.

creating a marketplace dominated by cheap foreign flowers, produced with cheap, unregulated labor. this put ours small family-owned businesses at an extreme disadvantage you can't tell me that it's cheaper to import nowers from colombia than it is to grow them in our own backyard. i drive through northern california on a very regular basis and see collapsed, dilapidated an unused greenhouses, literally littering the small towns and rural communities of california. it's clear this industry has taken a major hit over the last few decades due to this flawed trade policy. as we see more and more flower farms and greenhouses closing all over california, -- the speaker pro tempore: the time of the gentleman has expired. mr. levin: i yield the gentleman 30 seconds. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. thompson: this reminds us

of the last time we did business with colombia. this is anti-family business an anti-american jobs. i urge a no vote on the colombia trade bill and yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the time of the gentleman has expired. for what purpose does the gentleman from michigan rise? mr. camp: i yield one minute to the distinguished member of the ways and means committee, mr. davis. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for one minute. mr. davis: i i want to thank chairman camp and chairman brady for moving the three free trade agreements that are long overdue for our consideration. i urge my cloogs to support passage of all three free trade agreements. pass the -- passing the colombian agreement would signal our dedication to a faithful and strategic ally. in my service in the u.s. army, i ran operations serving jointly with the colombian military. watching the changes that have taken place, colombian troops are still serving in peacekeeping roles and serving

internationally in counterinsurgency and countermarkets roles arneds the globe. they have gone through an economic and social change. their region -- they're in a region that includes increasingly anti-american government, especially venezuela, let's strengthen our ties by ratifying the colombia free trade agreament. i urge my colleagues to support the colombian free trade agreement. thank you, chairman camp. i yield back the remainder of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from michigan. mr. levin: i yield two minutes to the distinguished member from nevada, a member of our committee, ms. buerkle. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman is recognized for two minutes. ms. buerkle: -- ms. berkley: thank you, mr. chairman. i rise today to talk about what should be congress' top priority, jobs, jobs, jobs.

the economic downturn has hit my state of nevada particularly hard and tamlies are still struggling with record unemployment. instead today we are debating the job-killing colombia free trade agreement that will result in more gad-paying american jobs being shipped overseas. in fact, this trade agreement taken together with panama and the korean trade agreement will cost our nation over $2 -- over 200,000 more jobs. how much more job loss can nevadans be expected to absorb before we stand up and say, enough is enough. congress needs to get our priorities straight. job creation needs to be our top priority. we must create a level playing field for the american worker. last night, the senate took a step in that direction by voting to stand up to the chinese government whose unfair currency manipulation has cost our nation over three million jobs in the last decade

including over 14,000 jobs in the state of nevada alone. the house should be following suit. instead of focusing on a trade agreement that will send more nevada jobs to foreign countries at a time when we can least afford it, we should reject the job-killing trade agreements, pass the china manipulation bill and -- currency manipulation bill and let's get on with the job of congress to create jobs for the american people, the american worker. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman yields back. the gentleman from michigan. mr. camp: thank you, mr. speaker. i yield two mins to the distinguished gentleman from virginia, mr. moran. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from virginia plrning moran, is recognized for two minutes. mr. moran: mr. speaker, i to understand the concern that my very good friends express on the democratic side about the threat of violence in colombia and the loss of jobs in america. but what i don't understand is how voting against this trade agreement helps on either

front. a no vote does nothing to create more jobs in america, nor in fact to reduce the level of violence in colombia. the fact is that the rate of vibles in colombia has been cut in half. the murder of trade union members is down by 80%. college enrollment is up by 50%. 90% of children are in school now. poverty is down 25%. why? in large part because of the $8 billion in plan colombia we provided. the colombian government wants to show their appreciation for our investment in colombian -- in colombia's future by letting us share in their new prosser pity. it's difficult to do that when they have arch tariff barriers of 9%, agriculture at 17%. the u.s. has virtually no tariff barriers. s that one-way street in our direction. the imports to colombia as a total of imports has dropped

from 21% to 9%, pause of the agreements colombia has signed with brazil, canada and others. they are about to further eat into american jobs by signing a trade agreament with the european union. we in america made the investment to help colombia become less violent, more democratic and more prosperous and now we want to disengage. rather than reap the benefits of producing jobs, products and services in america for export to colombia. seems to me my very good friends on the democratic side should support our president who is doing everything he can to create jobs here and he understands when we don't have tariff barriers we have to overcome in other countries we can better produce other services to sell to those countries and more jobs in this country. it seems to me on a yes vote on all three trade agreements is the right thing to do. the speaker pro tempore: the time of the gentleman has expired.

for what purpose does the gentleman from michigan, mr. levin, seek recognition? mr. levin: how much time is there on both sides? the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman michigan, mr. levin, has 15 minutes remaining. and the gentleman -- 14 1/4 remaining and the gentleman from michigan, mr. camp has -- i think i got it straight now. the two gentlemen from michigan, that makes it challenging. the gentleman from michigan, mr. camp, has 14 1/4 minutes remaining. the gentleman from michigan, mr. levin, has 15 minutes remaining. mr. levin: i guess this gentleman from michigan goes next. i now yield two minutes to another distinguished member of our committee, mr. kind of the great state of wisconsin. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from wisconsin, mr.

kind is recognized for two minutes. mr. kind: thank you, mr. speaker. i ask unanimous consent to revise and extend my remarks. i'm grateful for the gentleman from michigan's allotment of time and rise in strong support of the three trade agreements before us today, colombia, panama and south korea. for too long i feel the united states has been standing on the deadlines while other countries are moving on without us, opening up market share, establishing bilateral agreements with them, in the case of colombia because of our inability to come together and pass a trade agreement, in the last year alone, we've lost close to 50% market share with agricultural products that we'd normally be exports into the colombian market. being from wisconsin, the agriculture sexor is immensely important. the longer we delay, the more we're precluded from the market. i rise and share the concern of so many in regards to colombia.

i think the colombia of today is not the colombia of 10 years ago or even five years ago. much to the credit of mr. levin who worked tirelessly to make sure we had a labor action plan to work with colombia, to improve labor rights and protections, he thinks it should be a part of the body of the agreement. i think it's being implemented as we speak now and it's not necessary but the santos administration realizes it's in their best interest to do more to enhance labor rights in colombia and i think a large part of the credit goes to the gentleman seated next to me, mr. levin, but we're just 4% of the world's population. of course we have to have a proactive trade agenda the question is whether we'll be a member of a ruled-based trading system or not. these trade agreements now have core international labor and environmental standards in the bulk of the agreement, fully enforcement with -- enforceable with every other agreement of that's an attempt to elevate

standards upwards rather than seeing the race to the bottom so many of my colleagues are concerned about. that's the question before us today, involving clom ark panama and the larger market, south korea. whether we're going to move forward on trade agreements that have been much improved by the current administration, having inherited from the last or whether to continue to move forward withouty ewell -- without any rules with those countries have virtually unlimited access to ours and that's not reciprocal. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the yom from north carolina, ms. foxx, rise? . . ms. foxx: i send to the desk two privileged reports from the committee on rules for filing under the rule. the speaker pro tempore: the clerk will report the tilele of the resolution. the clerk: report to accompany house resolution 430, resolution providing for consideration of the bill h.r. 358, to amend the patient protection and affordable care act to modify special rules relating to coverage of abortion services under such act.

report to accompany house resolution 431, resolution providing for consideration of the bill h.r. 2273, to amend subtitle d of the solid waste disposal act to facilitate recovery and beneficial use and provide for the proper management and disposal of materials generated by the combustion of coal and other fossil fuels. the speaker pro tempore: referred to the house calendar and ordered printed. for what purpose does the gentleman from michigan rise? mr. camp: thank you, mr. speaker. i yield 1 1/2 minutes to the distinguished chairman of the agriculture committee, the gentleman from oklahoma, mr. lucas. the speaker pro tempore: the chairman of the committee on agriculture, mr. lucas is recognized for 1 1/2 minutes. mr. lucas: mr. speaker, i rise to voice my support for this free trade agreement on behalf of america's farmers and ranchers. all three free trade agreements under consideration today are essential for our nation's agricultural industry. out of every $100 in agricultural sales, more than

$25 comes from exports. so market access is critical to the success of our farmers and ranchers. colombia's particularly important to our producers because without a free trade agreement we have begun to lose market access. tariffs on american goods have made them more expensive and:ians are choosing to buy other countries' products instead. lost market access means lost income, lost jobs, and we cannot afford that. right now colombia imposes duties on all american agricultural products. they range from 5% to 20%. yet we still sell more than $830 million in agricultural products there. that's because america's farmers and ranchers produce high quality crops and livestock and those goods are in demand. under this agreement colombia will eliminate tariffs on 70% of our exports. we can be sure that when american agricultural products are no longer subject to tariffs and become more cost competitive, we'll see substantial benefits. in fact, the farm bureau estimates we'll see 370 million more dollars in farm exports to

colombia annually. while our farmers and ranchers will benefit from increased market access, they will not be alone. farm exports create jobs throughout the economy in processing, packaging, transportation, just to name a few industries. a vote to pass the colombia free trade agreement is a vote for job growth in all sectors. it's a vote to create income and opportunity for our farmers and ranchers. i strongly urge my colleagues to support this free trade agreement, keep america's agricultural industry competitive. the speaker pro tempore: the time of the gentleman from oklahoma has expired. for what purpose does the gentleman from michigan rise? mr. levin: i yield two minutes to the yeal from california, maximum -- gentlelady from california, maxine watt. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman from california, ms. waters, is recognized for two minutes. ms. waters: i thank the gentleman from michigan, congressman sander levin, for the time. i rise to oppose this so-called free trade agreement. i find it deeply disturbing that the united states congress is even considering a free trade agreementle with a country that

holds the world's record for assassinations of trade unionists, and would cause a loss of 55,000 jobs in the united states. the congressional black caucus has been working hard to create jobs. we held job fairs in five cities in the country. we have been working hard to create jobs because the unemployment rate in this country is unacceptable. 9.1 throughout the country. 11.3 for latinos, 16% for african-americans. we need jobs. not an unfair trade agreement. additionally according to colombia's national labor school 51 trade unionists were assassinated in colombia in 2010. that's more than the rest of the world combined. in addition, 21 unionists survived attempts on their lives. 338 unionists received death threats. 35 were forcibly displaced. 34 were arbitrarily detained. and seven just disappeared in

2010. another 23 unionists have been assassinated so far this year. and a total of 2,908 union members have been murdered in colombia since 1986. and the colombian attorney general's office has not obtained any convictions for these murders for the past four years. the people of colombia don't need a free trade agreement. they need a government that respects the rights of all of its citizens. let's vote down this trade agreement and tell the government of colombia that there can be no free trade without human rights and human dignity. i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman yields back the balance of her time. for what purpose does the gentleman from michigan rise? mr. camp: at this time i yield two minutes to the distinguished gentleman from new york, mr. meeks. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from new york, mr. meeks, is recognized for two minutes. mr. meeks: i thank the chairman. i thank the chairman for his work. i thank the ranking member.

let me start off by thanking mr. levin also, because indeed i know he's been back and forth to colombia. he made this a better trade bill by -- with the action plan. and it's your hard work and dedication, mr. levin, i thank you for doing that. yesterday i had a chance to talk briefly on the floor in regard to the economics of it, but i'm hearing about a lot of people talk about the past of colombia but not something that's taking place on the ground right now. i have heard a lot of individuals talk about how it may be devastating in its reference specifically to the african-american community. let me bring facts to the issue because i think oftentimes when i look and talked to president santos and the civil rights struggle here in america, i see some similarities we have to think about. there are positive things. a lot of positive things happening on the floor. for example for the first time we have the victim land restitution law passed by the government of colombia. we have the development projects. we have the mining and consultations law. we have addressing

discrimination, anti-discrimination laws that have been passed. we have the african-american colombia and indigenous program that has been passed by the colombia legislature. the leadership and scholarship program. the martin luther king scholarship program. we have the equal opportunity -- employment opportunities initiative. all of this is done by the santos government. we have the pathway to pros parlte. women and entrepreneurs mentoring network. we have scholarships for african-colombian police. we have the humanitarian assistance program. these are just some of the programs that is happening on the ground right now that are benefiting african colombians. when you talk about the leadership there, there is a devout leadership in -- diverse leadership in colombia just like here in america. just as the goal is to make sure that we enact certain things into laws so that we can make changes to make it better for people for tomorrow. that is what president santos has been doing. that's what has happened and

that's what is happening. and so i say with, some say, santos is not going to carry out. in my estimation when lyndon baines johnson became president -- mr. camp: yield additional 30 seconds. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from new york is recognized for an additional 30 seconds. mr. meeks: he did. he came with some of the most landmark legislation with reference to civil rights and voting rights in the history of this country. the same thing i see happening right now on the ground with president santos. landmark for the first time ever legislation addressing the rights of african colombians, and because of the work of mr. levin also landmark rights addressing the rights of all in labor. i think it's a positive thing we should pass this colombia free trade agreement because the right thing, we are moving in the right direction. we are not there yet but we are moving in the right direction. i yield back. thank you. the speaker pro tempore: the time of the gentleman from new york has expired. for what purpose does the gentleman from michigan, mr. levin, rise? mr. levin: i now yield two minutes to the gentleman from

ohio, the distinguished member from ohio, mr. kucinich. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from ohio, mr. kucinich, is recognized for two minutes. mr. kucinich: thank you very much, mr. speaker. i have listened carefully to this debate and i know that my good friend, mr. levin, and my friend, mr. camp, have worked to try to craft an agreement they feel is in the best interest of this country. but this debate cannot pass without pointing out some facts that concern those of us who are opposed to this. and according to the global trade watch, colombia's the world capital for violence against workers, with more unionists killed every year than in the rest of the world combined. unionist murders have been growing from 37 in 2007 after the deal was signed to 51 in 2010. even though colombia has been under maximum security. only 6% of the nearly 2,680

unionist murders that have occurred have been prosecuted to date. the deal doesn't require colombia to end the unionist murders or bring past perpetrators to justice to obtain special trade privileges. colombian unions oppose the deal and agree with u.s. unions that a recent action plan will not fix this horrific situation. colombia has the highest number of displaced persons in the world. outpacing even sudan because of forced displacement and land grabs often with colombian military involvement. i know there's been an attempt to try to address these, but i think that we have to get the government of colombia to answer these things first before we pass a trade agreement. don't believe that they have sufficiently done that. in particular they haven't brought to justice those who are responsible for the murder of all these unionists. i think that as a country which

supports the right of people, freedom of association, right of free speech if we do not stand for it in these trade agreements, then we can expect the same kind of conduct to occur. this is a concern that i have notwithstanding what i know are the honest good faith efforts by my colleagues who support this even though i don't. i urge the bill's defeat. the speaker pro tempore: the time of the gentleman from ohio has expired. the gentleman from michigan. mr. camp: i yield one minute to the distinguished gentleman from kansas. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from kansas, mr. yoder, is recognized for one minute. mr. yoder: i thank the chairman for the time, and i thank the speaker. if my colleagues listen to this debate today, if we listen to our states at home the constituents are asking to vote on one thing, jobs. we have talked about a lot of issues today, we talked about unions, all sorts of issues. at the end of the day the american people are asking us to focus on jobs. these trade agreements allow concern companies to export more products to colombia. they level the playing field. and they create jobs back here at home in america.

colombian is the third largest u.s. export market in latin america and for farmers and companies and places like kansas exports have grown 667% in the last 1 years, even with the one-side tariffs colombia is imposing. if we level the playing field, allow companies in kansas and across the country equal access to colombian markets, exports will go up, as will the jobs those exports create. mr. speaker, every day we don't pass these agreements we are falling behind in our companies and workers are at a disadvantage. our top priority is jobs, then it's time to open up these markets. put our businesses on a level playing field and crealed jobs -- create jobs at home as opposed to exporting them overseas. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the time of the gentleman from kansas has expired. for what purpose does the gentleman from michigan, mr. levin, rise? mr. levin: how much -- how many speakers do you have left, mr. camp? the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is asking the

gentleman from michigan -- mr. camp: we have several speakers left. we were trying to determine the number. mr. levin: i reserve the balance of the time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves the balance of his time. for what purpose does the gentleman from michigan, mr. camp, rise? mr. camp: does the gentleman from michigan have any additional speakers? mr. levin: i think not. i'm going to sum up myself. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from michigan, mr. levin, reserves the balance of his time. mr. camp: at this time i yield one minute to the distinguished gentleman from texas, mr. canseco. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from texas, mr. canseco, is recognized for one minute. mr. canseco: thank you, mr. chairman. i'm pleased to be able to cast my vote in support of the colombia free trade agreement. even though it's taken almost five years to get a vote on it, and i thank chairman camp, chairman dreier, and chairman brady for their leadership in

this cause. the colombia free trade agreement is important for several reasons. first, it will create jobs here in the united states. the international trade mission has estimated this will increase -- commission has estimated this will increase exports by more than $1 billion. it will grow our nation's economy by over $2 billion and create thousands of new jobs here at home. in the case of the 23rd district of texas, the colombia free trade agreement is of particular importance as i have a great deal of agriculture in my district and more than half of current u.s. agriculture exports to colombia will become duty free immediately and almost all remaining tariffs gone after 15 years. . this common strait ours commitment to a steadfast ally in latin america against oppressive regimes like chavez's venezuela. fundamentally it's about the freedom of the american people

to have a wide array of choices and to have those choices because of a power trade composition. the speaker pro tempore: does the gentleman from michigan, mr. levin, continue to reserve in mr. levin: i do. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from michigan, mr. camp, is recognized. mr. camp: at this time, i yield one minute to the distinguished gentleman from arizona, mr. flake. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for one minute. mr. flake: i rise in support of all three free trade agreements that will be on the floor today . in an era when we have a near constant supply of bailouts and federal spend, it's refreshing that the congress is doing today what it should be doing, that is creating an environment in a bipartisan way, under which businesses can create jobs and the economy can flourish. it's the appropriate role of congress to take these kinds of steps to simply create an environment and then step out of the way and let business create these jobs. arizona alone had more than $15

billion worth of merchandise exports aloan in 2010. more than half of this was exported to countries with which we have free trade agreements. these will expand the opportunities for that to increase. these arrangements will allow the private sector to create yous of new jobs an strengthen the economy in the long-term. again, that's the appropriate role for government, to create an environment where the private sector can create jobs. that's what free trade agreements do. that's why i'm pleased to support these agreements today. i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the time of the gentleman from arizona has expired. for what purpose does the gentleman from michigan, mr. camp rise? mr. camp: i reserve. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from michigan, mr. levin, rise. mr. levin: you're going to close after i do? i yield myself the plans of the time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from michigan, mr. levin, is recognized for nine minutes.

mr. levin: let me be clear what's at stake here on the colombia f.t.a. i feel so deeply about it. free trade agreements set the terms of competition between nations. it's more than about the mathematical flow of goods, the conditions for workers in the country we trade with are fundamental to that competition. workers in colombia have long been without their basic worker rights. more than any other democracy in the globe, there have been extreme levels of violence against workers and their leaders. there's been a universal, really a universal lack of justice for murders of union

activists. and there have been extension -- extensive flaws in colombia's labor law and practices. these conditions and the insistence of democrats that they be effectively and fully enforced are what held hundred consideration of the colombia free trade agreement. what has been long overdue was work on these conditions, and there wasn't by the bush or the uribe administrations. yes, it's taken five years, because most of those years were taken up by inaction by our administration, the bush administration, and by the administration previous to mr. santos. so earlier this year, an action plan of labor rights was negotiated between the new american and colombian

administrations and it included some commitments and deadlines at long last for colombia to address issues of worker rights, violence, and impunity. regretfully, some key obligations have not been met in a meaningful way. let me give you one example about a condition that i saw firsthand in visits to colombia. their employers have a history of using sham cooperatives and other contract relationships to camouflage true employment relationships and thereby to rob to rob workers of their rights. the i.l.o. has long identified this type of practice as among the most serious problems facing colombian workers. in colombia, only workers who

are directly employed can form a union and checkively bargain. colombia committed to stop such abuses in the action plan. it passed some far-reaching legislation and proposed effective regulations. but unfortunately, it then has becomed -- has backed away. it's allowed -- aloud employers in colombia, including a major beverage company and palm oil producers to begin converting cooperatives to other contract forms to continue denying workers their basic rights. so we privately, we democrats in the house, push the colombians for -- pushed the colombians for months to try to stem this problematic shifflet. but even a clarification issued on the eve of the markup last

week, after public pressure had been brought to bear, fell short. so this problem highlights precisely why it was vital to link the action plan to the f.t.a. we're voting on today. but regrettably, the republicans blocked any reference at all to the labor action plan in the implementation bill and unfortunately, the adnrgs -- administration acquiesced in that position. i just want to emphasize, explicitly linking the action plan to entry into force of the colombia f.t.a. was necessary as a vital step to ensure effective, meaningful implementation of the action plan. without such a linkage, we have

no leverage to ensure that colombia lives up to the commitments it's made. i also want to emphasize, it provides no context and meaning for the enforcement of the f.t.a. workers' rights standards in the future. the language in the f.t.a. is the basic international worker rights language. it is general in its provision. it has to be given meaning. and the action plan would help to give it meaning. if in the future action needed to be taken under the dispute settlement system system of when there's no linkage between the implementation bill and the action plan, it takes away the context for future action. other obligations under the action plan have not been meaningfully met. despite minimal requirements set in the action plan,

colombian employers continue to use direct negotiations with workers referred to as collective packages to thwart workers from organizing and i saw first hand the use of those collective packs -- p.a.c.s on up with of my three visits. another pervasive problem was highlighted, the problem of investigating an prosecuting murders of people trying to -- trying to exercise their rights. even those cases designated as priorities. colombian authorities obtained just six convictions of 195 union murders that occurred in the four-plus years leading up to may, 2011. it's told that the i.l.o. left

off clma on its list. that's because ememployers vetoed colombia being on the list. and notwithstanding clear commit. s under the action plan to improve the situation through reforms and investigatory policies an methods, colombia did not take the first step to do this, namely the analysis of union murder cases, on the eve of the markup, even though the action plan called for its compleags, it's clear that additional leverage is necessary. interviews by human rights watch with colombian prosecutors reveal there's been no clear direction to implement the new policies and methods as committed to under the action plan. i wish i could stand here today and say that colombia had

fully. mented the commitments under the action plan to date and very significantly, vitally, that the legislation incorporated the action plan and conditioned the f.t.a.'s entry into force on its effective implementation. i cannot in good conscience do so. therefore, i urge my colleagues to oppose the colombia free trade agreement. i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from michigan, mr. camp, rise? mr. camp: i yield myself the hance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. camp: i would say, mr. speaker, that well before the labor -- labor action plan was signed by president obama and president santos, colombia had raised their labor standards and aided union members in the exercise of their rights well before the action plan ever occurred. colombia now has implemented

all eight of the i.l.o. core conventions, six more than the united states. the statute of limitations for murder was raised from 20 to 30 years. the minimum prison sentence was raised from 13 to 25 years and the maximum raised from 25 to 40. the authority to declare the legality of strikes is now in the purview of the judiciary, not the executive branch. which depoliticizes these decisions and shows the transition and progress that colombia has made in this area. employers no longer have a unilateral right to force a strike to arbitration. the constitution reforms in 2004 shortened by 75% the time it takes to prosecute a homicide case. as i mentioned earlier, the murder rate in clom ark the murder rate against union members, has declined by 85% since 2002. as my democrat colleagues in support of the colombian trade agreement have said, the action plan, the labor action plan is

the most stringent labor action plan anywhere in the world. that has ever occurred. and with regard to the cooperative issue, the u.s. trade representative testified in the ways and means committee when we marked up this legislation that that loophole has been addressed and has been closed by the colombian government. this is something the administration agreed has occurred as well, not just myself. let me aggress the -- address the issue of the labor action plan being placed inside the trade agreement. i would just say that to force the entry -- to condition entry into force of the trade agreement with compliance with the labor action plan is completely inappropriate. that's why there was bipartisan opposition to doing that. i certainly welcome the gentleman's statement that i was able to get the administration to acquiesce to

not having the labor action plan put into the agreement. frankly, there was bipartisan agreement, the administration agreeing as well on that point. but let me just say, the trade agreement's labor chapter, there is a labor chapter in the agreament itself, that addresses the labor issues that appropriately fall within the scope of the agreement and the labor action plan goes well beyond that scope. let me say why. the much of the implementing will -- bill. the pup of the bill before the house today is to make changes to the united states laws necessary to implement the agreement the labor action plan doesn't require any changes to u.s. law so therefore it should not and is not in the bill. apart from being inappropriate, it's really unnecessary to condition entry into force on a labor action agreement that the colombiaen -- colombians have agreed to. they have demonstrated their agreament to fulfilling the

terms of the labor action plan, they have satisfied, and on time, every single action item that's come due this far and the administration, our administration, has certified they have satisfied those conditions. there's only a few conditions that remain which are due at the enof the year and a few due in 2012, which we fully expect they'll completely agree to. let me just say that it is high time we took up this agreement. last year, colombian exporters paid virtually no tariffs on goods coming into the united states but our exporters paid a tariff on an average of 11% trying to enter into their marget. this agreement removes that implans by eliminating the colombian duties. this need is urgent. our exporters have paid nearly $4 billion in unnecessary duties since this agreement was signed and has been pending over the years and we know from experience these agreements will yield the benefits that we

say they will. between 2000 and 2010, total u.s. exports increased by just over -- just over 60% but our exports to cupries in which we have to trade agreements increased by over 90%. . our exports to peru have more than doubled sips the passage of that agreement and those are very important statistics in these tough economic times. this is a major economic opportunity, delay has been costly. there are major economies whose workers and exporters compete directly with ours. they have moved aggressively to sign and implement trade agreements with colombia, canada, argentina, brazil. those undermine our competitive edge for our nation and our workers and our families. we have been falling behind. we have been losing export market share that took years to build, frankly, and for example just a u.s. share of colombia's

corn, wheat, and soybean imports it fell from 71% in 2008 to 27% in 2010. after argentina's exporters gained preferential access. obviously we have seen also a decline in our exports of wheat since canada signed its trade agreement with colombia two years after they entered into their agreement with colombia which was signed two years after ours. we owe it to u.s. workers. we owe it to our exporters to approve this agreement now and press the president for prompt implementation. i would urge strong support for this agreement and yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. pursuant to house resolution 425, the previous question is ordered on the bill. the question is on engrossment and third reading of the bill. those in favor will say aye. those opposed, no. the ayes have it. third reading. the clerk: a bill to implement the united states-colombia trade promotion agreement. the speaker pro tempore:

pursuant to clause 1-c of rule 19, further consideration of h.r. 3078 will be postponed. pursuant to clause 1-c of rule 19, further -- 3079 will now resume. the clerk will report the title. the clerk: union calendar number 157, h.r. 3079, a bill to implement the united states-panama trade promotion agreement. the speaker pro tempore: the time remaining on h.r. 3079 is as follows. the gentleman from michigan, mr. camp, will control 20 minutes. the gentleman from michigan, mr. levin, will control 20 minutes. and the gentleman from ohio, mr. kucinich, will control 20 minutes. the chair recognizes the gentleman from michigan, mr. levin. mr. levin: is -- the speaker pro tempore: is the gentleman on his feet? mr. levin: he's going to be polite to mr. camp.

does he want to go first? the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from michigan, mr. levin, is not seeking recognition. the gentleman from michigan, mr. camp, is seeking recognition. for what purpose does does the gentleman rise? mr. camp: i yield two minutes to the distinguished gentleman from washington state, mr. hastings. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from washington, mr. hastings, is recognized for two minutes. mr. hastings: thank you very much, mr. speaker. i ask unanimous consent to revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, so ordered. mr. hastings: mr. speaker, i rise today in strong support of the pending trade agreements, all three trade agreements, with colombia, south korea, and panama. in my home state of washington where one in three jobs is dependent on international trade, we understand the importance of expanding foreign markets for economic success. there is no question, mr. speaker, that these agreements will increase jobs. let me give you an example on a parochial basis on my district. today potato growers and processors face an 18% tariff when sending their product to

south korea. this agreement will end that tariff immediately, allowing our growers to fairly compete in this very important market. it is critical to my constituents that we act now on all three of these trade agreements. let me be parochial again, mr. speaker. apple sales in colombia dropped 48% last year because chile had duty free access to the colombia market while my growers in my state did not. in fact they had a 15% tariff. the passage of this agreement is expected to increase apple sales by 250,000 boxes a year. allowing us to regain a market share or at least to compete on a level playing field. as our economy is struggling to recover, i encourage all my colleagues to act now to support all three of these trade agreements because all three of these trade agreements will expand an opportunity for our economy to grow and especially,

mr. speaker, especially the agriculture and diverse agriculture economy i have in central washington. with that i thank the gentleman for yielding. i yield back my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. for what purpose does the gentleman from michigan, mr. levin, rise? mr. levin: i yield two minutes to the gentleman from texas, mr. doggett, a member of our committee. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from texas, mr. doggett, is recognized for two minutes. mr. doggett: thank you. while this agreement based upon the flawed framework of the bush-cheney administration offers no model for the future with regard to workers or environmental protection, i am supporting today's measure because of a successful response to a long-standing concern that i have had. that is, panama status as a notorious tax haven, a place where taxpayers who refuse to pay their fair share of the cost of our national security and vital public services could go to hide their assets and dodge taxes. over two years ago, about two

years ago senator carl levin and i urged the administration to postpone the approval of this trade agreement until panama first signed a tax information exchange agreement where we could get information about assets hidden there and change its laws regarding bank secrecy and other matters to assure that this agreement was meaningful. panama has now met these conditions. for the first time ever, we can obtain information from the panamanian government on u.s. taxpayers who have panamanian assets or income. though the treasury department should have secured a stronger automatic information exchange similar to the one we have with canada and 24 other countries, and i would much prefer also to see an actual record of panamanian compliance, we need to accept this agreement as a victory in the fight against offshore tax cheats. this would not have been possible had it not been for the strong panamanian desire to get

the trade agreement approved. by also agreeing to 12 other exchange agreements on tax information, panama was recently removed from the oecd gray list of tax havens. now we must ensure that panama's new-found openness and transparency does not end with approval of today's agreements. i support this trade agreement knowing that while it could have been much better, the dangers have been milt gated with an agreement -- mitigated with an agreement that has a very modest scope. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. for what purpose does the gentleman from ohio, mr. kucinich, rise? mr. kucinich: i yield myself one minute. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from ohio is recognized for one minute. mr. kucinich: the right to workers which have increasingly come under attack in this country are also at risk under these nafta-style trade agreements. in panama a 2010 state

department human rights report notes that, quote, the government lacked sufficient mechanisms to ensure that laws prohibiting employer interference in unions and protecting workers from employer reprisals were adequately enforced. so that the government lacks sufficient mechanisms, make sure they are adequately enforced. we shouldn't be entering into a trade agreement with a country that has yet to demonstrate its ability to uphold international standards for labor rights. and financial regulation. panama's track record on fulfilling its promises is clear. just as it failed to adequately address its status as a tax haven wonderland, it has failed in its promise to adequately protect workers. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. does the gentleman from michigan, mr. camp, seek recognition? mr. camp: i do. thank you, mr. speaker. i yield two minutes to a distinguished member of the ways and means committee, the gentleman from kentucky, mr.

davis. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from contract contract is recognized for two minutes. mr. davis: thank you, mr. speaker. i thank chairman camp and chairman brady for their leadership on the pending free trade agreements, all three countries have seen incredible transformation take place over the last generation, especially panama and colombia. for what has happened in the last 25 years as they have revolutionized their economies, they revolutionized socially and their democracies are robust. i rise in support of the pending trade agreement with panama to encourage my colleagues to support passage of this important agreement. it's critical not just to our economy but also for our national security. passage of this agreement will mark renewed u.s. engagement. and china's increasing prominence in south america. additionally the u.s. is the largest user of the panama canal and works closely with the panamanian government to ensure safety of the canal itself to enhance port security. for this critical asset alone in

maintaining that retionship, it would be essential to passing this agreement. i'd like to comment on one other aspect of security that's been enhanced in all three trade agreements. that's the security of intellectual property rights. these agreements, all three of them, korea, panama, and colombia, make significant improvements to ipr protects. for all three categories, u.s. companies will be treated no less favorly -- fayably that partners in the countries. they include state-of-the-art protection for u.s. trademarks. the agreements include enhanced protection for copyrighted works. and ultimately the agreements include stronger protections for patents and trade secrets. if we look at the changing demographics of the world in the face of relationships, it is important that we turn our eyes to the south and to the west. strengthening our ties with latin america and south america, strengthening our ties with asian democracies and republics through the korean free trade agreement. what we are doing with man ma --

panama, colombia, and korea is critical to our future, our children's future, i strongly urge passage of the panama free trade agreement. it's a great step forward. it's a great step in our alliance. i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the time of the gentleman from kentucky has expired. for what purpose does the gentleman from michigan seek recognition? mr. levin: i yield to the distinguished gentleman from massachusetts. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from massachusetts is recognized for five minutes. thank you, mr. levin,. plrl neal: the u.s.-panama free trade agreement is an example how to doll a trade agreement right. this agreement will improve the u.s. trade surplus, emphasis on the word surplus, with panama and help with u.s. job creation and economic growth. and thanks to the f.t.a. panama has brought its labor laws up to international standards and addressed panama as status as a tax haven. let's start with economics. in massachusetts which exported a total of over $8 billion worth

of merchandise in 2010, the total number of jobs created in my district supported by exports is over 26,000. new exports helped to support new jobs and that's why i support the panamanian free trade agreement. panama is one of the fastest growing economies in latin america. this f.t.a. will eliminate tariffs and other barriers to u.s. exports and expand trade between our two countries. nor example, most goods from panama currently enter the u.s. duty free. whereas u.s. exporters face import duties in panama ranging from five to over 35%. this f.t.a. will level the playing field by eliminating panama's import duties on u.s. goods. as a result, u.s. passenger vehicle exports are expected to increase by 43% and machinery exports are expected to increase by 14%.

furthermore, panama is currently free to discriminate against u.s. suppliers in government procurement. including the ongoing $5.25 billion panama canal expansion project. the f.t.a. will require panama to treat u.s. suppliers the same as panamanian suppliers. there is going to be an explosion of opportunity with the opening of the panama canal after its expansion. now, let's go to labor rights. over the course of several years house democrats, myself included, have identified a variety of deficiencies in panama's labor laws. and we insisted that the panamanian f.t.a. not be considered until those issues were addressed. in april of this year, panama's president signed into law the last remaining changes needed to bring panamanian laws into compliance with labor obligations of this agreement. furthermore, when we took the majority in 2007, house democrats insisted that the

f.d.a. be negotiated or renegotiated to include the may 10 agreement, among other things the f.t.a. was renegotiated to require panama to comply with international labor in key international environmental agreements. labor rights, environmental concerns, human rights we insisted that those be undertaken and we were told at one time that the agreement offered had to be all or nothing. . now, let me highlight how panama has addressed its tax haven issue and i would submit to you today there is no member of this house that has a stronger credential on cracking down on tax havens than i do. we've had some success with more guaranteed to come. in 200the oecd listed panama as a tax haven but since that time panama has worked to adopt

international standards of transparency and an effective exchange of information. in 2010 the u.s. and panama entered into a tax information exchange agreement and this past july the oecd placed panama on the white list of countries who have substantially implemented international standards for exchange information. these are substantial advancements. this would not have been possible without democrats in this house who insisted that the f.t.a. not be submitted to congress until the tax haven issue was addressed. this f.t.a. is a better agreement because house democrats insisted on those basic human rights issues. there is no question that labor agreements, human rights agreements have been included because of work by the minority in the house. these trade agreements are not

necessarily panaceas but by and large the ones i supported over a career and some i've opposed have had a net impact on economic growth. these are very difficult issues for members of this body to undertake. but we argue that the genius of opportunity is what steve jobs promoted through much of his life with many setbacks along the way. but understand that many of the products that steve jobs and his genius succeeded in implementing ensures that people across the globe use those products today. and i think this is an example of those opportunities. thank you, mr. speaker. the speaker pro tempore: who yields time? mr. camp: i would say this agreement promotes new market access for consumer and industrial products. over 87% of our exports to

panama will become duty-free immediately with tariffs to be phased out over 10-year period. this will cut more than half the average 80% tariff that our exporters face. this will provide u.s. firms with an advantage over major competitors over europe and asia and because panama recently signed an agreement with the e.u., we need to have ours entered immediately. it's not what the u.s. and panama is doing in a vacuum, it's what the rest of the world is doing as well. as i said, there are key export sectors that get immediate duty-free treatment, medical and scientific agreement. this levels the playing field for our exporters versus importers from panama and this agreement will create new opportunities for our farmers and ranchers. more than half of the current u.s. farm exports to panama will become duty-free

immediately. it gives our u.s. farmers an advantage over our e.u. and canadian competitors. our exports in agriculture to panama now face a 15% average tariff. our exports of pork, rice, soybeans and wheat and most fresh fruit will receive immediate duty-free treatment while our competitors in asia and europe will continue to face tariffs on those commodities as high as 90% and that's why you've seen great support, both bipartisan, for this agreement. the american farm bureau estimates that the increase in farm exports to panama alone could increase our agriculture exports by $46 million a year. obviously this agreement also provides our access to panamanian services markets. it will give our u.s. service firms market access, national treatment, regulatory transparency, and that is going to be very helpful as we

continue to try to grow our economy and create jobs here in the united states. and i would agree with my friend from massachusetts, panama has improved their tax transparency and because of the adoption of the tax information exchange agreement as well as other numerous double taxation treaties that i won't repeat that he referenced, they have been removed by the oecd from the so-called gray list to join countries such as the united states that meet internationally agreed to tax standards. so by almost any measure this agreement is positive. it is something we should strongly support, and i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker: the gentleman from ohio. mr. kucinich: thank you very much, mr. speaker. i yield myself four minutes. the speaker: the gentleman is recognized for four minutes. mr. kucinich: public citizen is an organization that dead

indicates itself to an im-- dead indicates itself to an impartial -- dedicates itself to an impartial economic trade agreements. they looked at the panama trade agreement and here's what they came up. they said it includes extreme foreign investor privileges and offshoring protections and their private enforcement and international tribunals. it includes limits on financial and other service sector regulation. a ban on buy america procurement preferences. limits on environmental safeguards and imported food and product safety. limits on drug patent rules that limit generics. the afl/cio is one of the most important workers' organizations in the history of this country.

they've analyzed the panama free trade agreement and here's what they have said. they said it's the wrong trade model at the wrong time. instead of helping workers here or in panama, it rewards the country that has a history of repressing labor rights and has achieved much of its economic growth by making it easy for money launderers and tax dodgers to hide their income from legitimate authorities. moreover, this agreement, which was negotiated by the previous administration, contains too many flawed trade policies of the past. rather than laying out a new and progressive vision for the future. president obama should not waste valuable time and effort advancing an inadequate agreement but should instead focus on effective job creation measures, including currency reform, infrastructure investment and robust training and education.

and reforming our trade model so that it strengthens labor right protections for all workers, safeguards domestic laws and regulations and promotes the export of goods, not jobs. the afl-cio said that the economic impact of the panama free trade agreement is likely to be small. panama's g.d.p. is tiny in comparison to that of the united states, and panama accounted for less than .5% of total u.s. exports in 2010. thus, any demand for u.s. goods and services is likely to be minuscule. this is simply not an agreement that will substantially increase net exports or create american jobs. while the panama f.t.a. contains -- and we have to say it contains improved labor and environmental provisions that

these provisions need to be further strengthened and our government needs to invest more resources in energy and more consistent enforcement across the board. and that president obama should work to further improve the labor, environment, investment, financial services and government procurement provisions contained in a panama free trade agreement to build a new trade model for the future. the afl-cio also pointed out another thing, mr. speaker. they said that panama's not part of any meaningful u.s. jobs plan. even the obama administration is not selling the panama free trade agreement as a job-creating measure. panama's economy is so small that the u.s. international trade commission was unable to quantify any job creation effects of the panama free trade agreement. while economists routinely predict that trade agreements between the u.s. and developing countries will create jobs and improve our trade imbols, the fact is that these fail to pan

out. the current u.s. approach to trade agreements has tended to destroy jobs, not create them. the speaker: the gentleman's time has expired. the gentleman from michigan. mr. camp: at this time i yield two minutes to the distinguished gentleman from new mexico. the speaker: the gentleman from new mexico is recognized for two minutes. mr. pearce: thank you, mr. speaker, mr. chairman. i rise in support of the three free trade agreements we are considering today. free trade is good for america. it will increase our products flowing to other countries that currently get to send their product for free here. we live in a world where products flow freely around the world. it's time for us to get american jobs to produce some of those goods moving abroad. i would note that the president has asked us to pass pieces of his legs. his jobs creating legislation, i would compliment the chairman that we have waited 2 1/2 years to get this particular proposal from the administration.

in less than nine days now we have it on the floor of the house. we're serious about doing things to fix the economy. while the president lecksures us, he fails to follow through on regulatory relief, tax relief. he fails to follow through on those things which would actually create jobs. so we in the house appreciate the opportunity to bid on -- to vote on these particular bills today because it is our way of saying we will agree with the president when he is right and we will steadfastly disagree with him when he is wrong. we have many areas that we can move forward together on, and i would recommend that the president come and sit down with us, come back to the floor of the house and sit and discuss with us the way to move forward instead of pushing a plan that says my way or the highway. we have generally a great threat from american government on american jobs.

the overregulation is killing jobs in the electrical utility field. it's killing jobs in the oil and gas. it's killing jobs in manufacturing. we can protect workers. we can protect the environment. we can protect species and create jobs simultaneously. it is up to us, the policymakers, to find those balance points and to move forward with commonsense legislation that will affect these. i yield back. thank you, mr. chairman. the speaker: who yields time? the gentleman from michigan. mr. levin: mr. speaker, i now yield two minutes to another member of our committee, mr. kind of wisconsin. the speaker: the gentleman from wisconsin is recognized for two minutes. mr. kind: thank you, mr. speaker. i ask unanimous consent to revise and extend. the speaker: without objection. mr. kind: mr. speaker, i rise in strong support of the panama trade agreement as well as the colombia and south korea agreements before us today. and in the matter of panama, to panama's credit and to panama's

parliament's credit they realize that in order for this trade agreement to be fully considered by the congress they have to make improvements in regards to the tax havens of their country. as the chairman of the ways and means pointed out, they did that. they took that additional step, removing them from the gray list of tax havens internationally. that brings to the larger point. i believe when president obama took office, he had three good trade agreements but he knew they could be improved upon which they immediately set out to do. and to the credit of many members of the ways and means committee, especially the chairman and the ranking member both from michigan and the tireless efforts they put in to improving these free trade agreements, we finally reached to a point where we can get back in the game. as just 4% of the world's population, we have to be engaged with a pro-active trade agreement. the last time we had a trade agreement was six years ago.

that's too long when we have a floundering economy. not that these trade agreements will be a panacea to rapid and significant job growth but they will be helpful. in fact, countries like panama and colombia have virtually tutey-free access to our country -- duty-free access to our country's markets right now. we need to help the jobs being created here in the united states, and in the specific case of panama, tariff reductions will be significant that will lead to further job growth in both the manufacturing, the service, the agriculture sectors alone. but i commend the obama administration and the team at ustr led by ambassador kirk with the work they did in improving this panama trade agreement along with colombia and south korea putting them in position where there can be bipartisan support and more importantly to get us back into the arena of active trade which will help create jobs here at home. i thank you and i yield back. the speaker: the gentleman's

time has expired. who yields time? the gentleman from ohio. mr. kucinich: i yield three minutes to the distinguished the gentlelady from maine, a -- the distinguished gentlelady from maine, ms. pingree. the speaker: the gentlelady from maine is recognized for three minutes. ms. pingree: thank you to my friend and colleague from ohio for yielding this time. mr. speaker, i rise in opposition to the proposed trade agreement. the panama free trade agreement is structured exactly like nafta, a trade policy that resulted in the loss of millions of manufacturing jobs all over america. . in maine alone we have lost 31,000 manufacturing jobs since nafta was ratified in 1994. in addition to manufacturing jobs, it has hurt our agricultural and fishing sector and has had a huge impact on the economy of our state. i have a perfect example. a man from brewer, maine, comes

to mind. he worked in a factory for 22 years making components used by g.m., ford, and chrysler. now those parts are being made in mexico. steve wrote this in the bang gore daily news. we were given the opportunity if we wished to travel to mexico and further to train our replacements. my co-workers who went said the conditions for the mexican workers were very poor and far below the american standard. the pay rate was very low and they would work long hours every day of the week. and here we are today voting on three more trade agreements that could have the same devastating consequences for american jobs. why would we do this? at a time when we desperately need these jobs right here in the united states. this week in addition to the three free trade agreements we will also vote on the extension of trade adjustment assistance, a program that was created for those adversely affected by trade agreements. for several years and probably

many more we have and will spend millions of dollars retraining people who have been put out of work by misgited trade agreements. -- misguided trade agreements. and for what? so big companies can get a better deal on cheap labor and looser environmental standards in other countries? what our workers today want, what the people in my state, the state of maine want, are jobs. not retraining, not some idea of another job to come in the future, they want a job today. they don't want these trade agreements. and they don't want to lose any more jobs in our state. mr. speaker, america has a long history of supporting our hardworking families, but this policy does not invest in our work force. it is not what's right for america's future, and i cannot support it. i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker: the gentleman from michigan. mr. camp: thank you, mr. speaker. at this time i yield three minutes to the distinguished

chair of the trade subcommittee, the gentleman from texas, mr. brady. the speaker: the gentleman from texas is recognized for three minutes. mr. brady: thank you, mr. chairman. mr. speaker, i first want to thank you, chairman camp, and speaker boehner, for insisting that the white house submit the panama trade agreement along with colombia and korea to ensure that we open all three markets equally to american farmers, manufacturers, service, and technology companies. but for your work we would not be here today. this agreement is long overdue. as you know, as families know, the world has changed. it's not simply enough to buy american, we have to sell american all throughout the world. panama is a dynamic new market for america. almost 9% a year economic growth. far stronger than our own. panama's important to our manufacturers in america. it's important to our farmers. it's especially important to our service companies because so much of panama's economy matches

up beautifully with america's economy. and with the expansion of the panama canal, you are going to see increased cargo at our ports, increased jobs along our coasts, and lower prices and products in america as well. critics will say panama is too small an economy, why do we bother. in this dismal economy of america, every sale, every job counts and our competitors from europe, to canada, thailand, and singapore, and many more negotiate sales agreements with the panama because they know those customers matter. critics say panama's a tax haven, why are we doing this agreement? those simply aren't the facts. and they often say the labor rights aren't what they ought to be. panama has passed more than a dozen labor laws that dramatically commit and raise the standards of labor protection in that country. they have passed tax information

agreements with america and with other countries around the world, so much so that they are now considered in standing on tax transparency equal to the united states. this is a valued ally in a strong and growing part of the world that frankly has waited far too long. it is embarrassing it's taken four years to bring this agreement to the floor, but today it is here and today we will signal we are going to open those markets, we are going to strengthen our ties, and we are going to pass this sales agreement with panama. i yield back. the speaker: for what purpose does the gentleman from ohio rise? mr. kucinich: mr. speaker, i rise for the purpose of a unanimous consent. the speaker: the gentleman is recognized. mr. kucinich: i ask unanimous consent of the house to let mr. mi shoe manage the -- michaud manage the remainder of the time. the speaker: without objection, so ordered. who yields time? the gentleman from michigan. mr. levin: i yield three minutes

to another distinguished member of our committee, mr. pascrell, of new jersey. the speaker: the gentleman from new jersey is recognized for three minutes. mr. pascrell: thank you, mr. speaker. mr. speaker, panama will be the only trade deal that i will vote for because they import very little to the united states in the first place, but more importantly this is, as i see it, new opportunities for the u.s. gulf and east coast ports. over 60% of the goods shipped through the canal sail to or from the united states. i think they corrected what needed to be corrected. there is no indication of a loss of american jobs. i think that's what we should be all about. as for colombia how anyone could stand in front of the american people and say that colombia is

making progress in terms of the concerted conspiratorial effort proven time and time again to stop the murder of unionist, trade unionists in that country? in fact, there have been no convictions in 94% of the cases from 1986 to 2010. 6% of convictions. how anybody could stand on this floor, mr. speaker, and compare the system of justice there to the system of justice in the united states. some have suggested, well, we have murders here in this country, too. of course there is. this is an absolute disgrace. we lost our soul on this deal. no question about it. but a number of multinational companies didn't want the china

currency fixed because it doesn't help their big businesses and their purposes. well, it's come to the crux of the issue. if we would have put together all the promise that is were made to the american workers for the past 25, 30 years on trade deals, we would be very, very disappointed. this deal has come a long way, perhaps, since the last administration because neither party is privy to perfection here. this is not a one party rap. i'm looking at this in the context, i read every one of these deals as much as i could. there are good aspects of the deal, but let's take, for instance, the united states international trade commission does not believe this bill will

create jobs. let me repeat that. over and over again. in fact, in fact, the updated report that they provided to the congress -- the speaker: the gentleman's time has expired. mr. pascrell: that's three minutes? can i have another minute? thank you, mr. speaker. the speaker: how much time was yielded? 30 seconds, the gentleman is recognized for. mr. pascrell: the updated report contains a very specific disclaimer that is not an official estimate. when are we going to stop the hemorrhaging of american jobs? it is part of what we have gone through, both parties, but more importantly the entire nation over the last four or five years. no trade, every trade deal does not mean that there's jobs created in this country.

in fact, 90% of the trade deals have led to a lessening of jobs in the united states of america. so you can't have high hopes and you don't have the evidence to show it. let's bring jobs here to this country. the speaker pro tempore: -- the speaker: the gentleman's time has expired. for what purpose does the gentleman from texas rise? >> mr. speaker, i yield two minutes to the chairman of the agriculture committee and champion of new markets, mr. lucas. the speaker: the gentleman from oklahoma is recognized for two minutes. mr. lucas: mr. speaker, i rise to voice my support for this free trade agreement with panama. trade agreements open market access to our farmers and ranchers which brings in valual and come and creates jobs. in my home state of oklahoma agriculture exports support more than 10,000 jobs across the country ag exports more than one million jobs total. those jobs aren't confined to the farm, either. they stretch across a variety of industries, including

processing, manufacturing, transportation. in fact, for every dollar of farm products that we export we add another $1.31 to our economy from those nonfarm industries. that's why it's so important to continue opening markets for american agricultural products. more than 60% of our agricultural exports to panama face some sort of duty or tariff. those tariffs average 15%, but they can be as high as 70% on meat, 90% on grain, and staggering 260% on poultry. meanwhile, more than 99% of panama's farm exports enter the u.s. duty free. so this agreement will not only create new opportunities for america's farmers and ranchers, but it levels the playing field for exporters. as soon as this agreement is implemented, more than half of our farm exports will become duty free. so we can expect to see immediate opportunities once this agreement is in force. america's farmers, ranchers, processors, manufacturers, and shippers can all benefit from

those opportunities. let's help them expand their businesses and create more jobs. let's pass this agreement. i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker: the gentleman from maine. mr. me show: thank you, mr. speaker. i now yield two minutes to the woman from ohio, ms. kaptur. the speaker: the gentlelady from ohio is recognized for two minutes. ms. kaptur: thank you, mr. speaker. i thank mr. michaud for yielding. i'm proud to stand here today voicing the concerns of america's workers and rise in opposition to the panama free trade agreement as well as the south korean and colombian. like many others in terms of panama, i have expressed concerns about panama's long history of being a tax hache. supporters of this nafta-style trade deal claims that the tax information and exchange agreement that panama ratified in april of this year wiped away decades of secrecy as a tax

haven there and we have been told that panama's recent removal from the oecd's gray list indicates it's a fresh start. well, i ask when have the promises made in other nafta-style trade deals that have brought us these trade deficits since nafta was first signed, when have they ever made good on their agreements? public citizen notes that the 2001 panama tax agreement called tiea includes a major expense, major exception that allows panama to reject specific requests if it's contrary to the public policy of panama. now that's an interesting concept. for a country that derives a significant national income from activities related to being a tax haven. time has proven those who oppose these nafta-type trade accords direct. they have all been job losers. otherwise america would have a

trade balance but we have a half a trillion dollar trade deficit. surely might sell a few more pork chops and soybeans, you know what? overall america loses almost all of its g.d.p. growth simply because the trade deficit is just squashes down the opportunity for job creation in our country. we have seen millions and millions of jobs outsourced. let me say a word about the u.s.-korea trade agreement. that's modeled after nafta, too. and again it's one of these copycat agreements. in the last decade alone these agreements have cost americans over six million jobs. 55,000 plants have been lost. so many outsourced. what world do you live in if you don't even understand what's happening to the country between our borders from atlantic to pacific? i'm from northern ohio. mr. speaker, may i ask the gentleman does he have an extra time to yield? mr. michaud: i yield an

additional minute. ms. kaptur: i thank the gentleman. just to clarify what this means for one of america's lodestar industries, here's a little graph that shows how many korean cars are coming into the united states today. over half a million. this little dot here represents what we are getting in the korean market right now, 7,450 cars in that market versus over half a million cars here. this agreement basically says maybe america could sell 75,000 cars but there knees guarantee, no guarantee. if you go to korea today, less than 5% of their cars on the street are from anywhere else in the word. it is a closed marker. when is america going to stand up in its trade policies? to state manage capitalism in these other countries and give our workers and our companies an even break. all this deal says is, we might sell. .

might sell up to 75,000 cars in that economy and they're already eating our lunch. this agreement will cost us another 159,000 net jobs. you know, mr. speaker, i sure hope they don't come out of ohio again. i hope they come out of the district of every single person here who will vote for this agreement. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman's time has expired. the gentleman from michigan. mr. levin: i now yield two minutes to the gentleman from utah, mr. matheson. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from utah is recognized for two minutes. mr. matheson: thank you, madam speaker. i thank mr. levin for yielding me some time. i find when we talk about issues around here we hear the same thing we've heard for years and years and years. and sometimes that's a good thing, but sometimes it's also important to acknowledge that the world is changing, things are happening, globalization is a mixed bag, globalization

creates opportunities but it also creates a lot of challenges. and as policymakers, what we need to do is where we can look to best position this country to compete in that changing environment. now i rise in support of all three of these agreements because i tell you what's going on compared to years ago. the rest of the world's moving on. the rest of the world is opening up markets to each other and u.s. products and u.s. opportunities are being limited by that phenomenon. for example, in colombia, 2008, the united states was responsible for 46% of all the goods coming into colombia. but what happened after 2008? well, colombia entered into bilateral trade agreements with argentina and brazil and just two short years later in 2010 the u.s. only had 20% of the products that were being shipped into colombia. that's a pretty thick drop. about 25% of all the materials coming in that country, the u.s. used to have that market

and then we lost it. we should seek out the fairest deals, the best deal for this country but we should not be in denial. we should not be in denial of markets elsewhere -- and doing nothing. and mind you, in the case of colombia in particular, it's already had opportunities for markets in the u.s. because of the caribbean base initiative, their goods have been coming here duty-free for years. we have an opportunity now to level that playing field. and so i encourage my colleagues to recognize where we are in 2011 and the circumstances we're in and what other countries in the world are doing to respond to the opportunities presented by globalization and dealing with mitigating the problems. i encourage for all three of these trade agreement. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. the gentleman from texas. mr. brady: in manufacturing we actually run a trade surplus, including nafta. our trade deficit with our

nontrade agreement partners that we have troubles with, panama is a surplus for america. i yield now two minutes to a key member of the ways and means committee who has helped lead the freshman class in opening new markets and finding new customers to come, the gentleman from new york, mr. reed. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. reed: i rise in support of all three trade agreements we will be voting on today. it's a good day. with passage of these trade agreements approximately 250,000 new jobs across america. those are new jobs that will put families back to work, that will put roofs over their head, put food on their table and allow them to enjoy the american dream i rise in particular to the u.s.-panama agreement. some of my dregs colleagues, madam speaker, have argued that free trade has forced a lot of our manufacturing and

industrial jobs to go overseas. well, what are the facts of the circumstances? it can be illustrated by what's going on to u.s. and panama. our goods that go in face up to a 260% tariff at its borders. yet, the imports coming from panama to america because of the caribbean basin initiative and the caribbean basin trade partnership act come to us duty-free. that is an uneven playing field, and what these free trade agreements do in my humble opinion is even the playing field so that american workers can compete on an equal and level playing field. and if that is the case i am confident that the american worker and the american families will always win in that competition. so i strongly support these trade agreements, and it's amazing to me that it has taken five years to get these agreements to this chamber.

but rather than point fingers at who caused what and what the reasons for those delays were, i will always look to the future. and what these agreements will represent is a step in the right direction of getting america back in a position where it competes on the world market and once again rises up and says we are the strongest, we are the best, and we will create 250,000 new jobs. with that i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. who seeks recognition? the gentleman from michigan. mr. levin: i now yield 2 1/2 minutes to a new parent who's bringing a picture of his new son with him to the podium, mr. polis of colorado. congratulations. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from colorado is recognized for 2 1/2 minutes. mr. polis: i thank the gentleman from michigan. today i'm pleased to see that congress is finally focused on america's top priorities, jobs.

as economic experts across the ideological spectrumes that agreed, these frayed agreements for colombia, panama and south korea will create 250,000 jobs for americans at a time when we need them. i'm also going to vote yes because these trade pacts will put money in the pockets of hardworking americans by lifting aggressive tariffs on many purchased and we can cut the essentials. tariffs is like a sales tax on imported goods. like sales tax in many states they're regressive. a small amount of items that many americans use like sneakers and clothing and our household items comes with a tariff that's higher than many luxury items. a pair of fancy italian loafers has a tariff is 4.5%. but sneakers that moms and dads

pay has a tariff of 50%. cot -- a silk armani shirt comes with a 1% tariff. not only are they hard in the middle class, they can expand their operations and hire more workers with these three trade deals. in my district, four companies pay hundreds of thousands of dollars in tariffs just to the colombian government. that translates into jobs in my district. most important low, as the gentleman from michigan mentioned as a new father, i think of the kind of world i want my son to grow up in. i want a world that reduces barriers between peoples, between the flow of goods and ideals so we can fully embrace our brothers and sisters in colombia, our brothers and sisters in south korea, in panama and indeed across the world to build a common greatness of humidity that manifests itself -- of humanity

that manifests itself culturally and to better establish the greatness of global culture. congress should pass these three trade deals. i'm proud to support these three job-creating free trade agreements. i compliment president obama on his leadership bringing these deals before us, and i encourage my colleagues to vote yes to create jobs in america. and i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the gentleman from texas. mr. brady: madam speaker, i'd like to inquire as to how many speakers we have remaining? if i may. >> i have one more plus i'll be closing. mr. levin: i will close on our side. mr. brady: we have two more and then closing. at this time i'd like to yield one minute to the chairman of energy and water subcommittee for appropriations, the gentleman from new jersey, mr. frelinghuysen. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from new jersey is recognized for one minute. mr. frelinghuysen: i ask unanimous consent to revise and

extend. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. frelinghuysen: mr. chairwoman, i rise in support of the three free trade agreements with panama, south korea and colombia. further shows that delays would put 380,000 american jobs at risk whereas passing them will create over a quarter of a million new jobs and add $13 billion to our gross domestic product. the latest data shows 130,000 jobs in new jersey depend on international trade. of these 50,000 are manufacturing jobs. approximately one out of every six manufacturing jobs in new jersey is directly related to global trade. we need more activity on the trade export agenda, and these free trade agreements will produce many, many hundreds of thousands of jobs. we need to get about it. i strongly support it and yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the

gentleman yields back. the gentleman from maine. mr. michaud: madam chair, may i inquire how much time is remaining on all sides? the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from maine has 9 1/2 minutes remaining. the gentleman from michigan has three minutes. and the gentleman from michigan, mr. camp -- well, the gentleman from texas, mr. brady, has 3 3/4 minutes remaining. mr. michaud: thank you. i would now like to yield three minutes to the gentleman from oregon, mr. defazio. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from oregon is recognized for three minutes. mr. defazio: united states of america has failed trade policies.

they're unlike any other in the world. and i guess the question before this body should be, will these trade policies create jobs? the answer is yes. will they create jobs in america? the answer is no. like all the other free trade agreements we've entered into, these are designed to benefit multinational companies seeking cheap labor and fewer restrictions in terms of the environment and labor protections and other things overseas. that's what these are about. they are also about shipment of fwoods with the low content requirement in korea. yeah, good will be cheaper. made in china. made made -- maybe made by slave labor in korea will be cheap. we will benefit more if their

neighbors had a job and they had jobs and our kids had a future. this has led to the sea of red ink isn't going to fix the problem. directly before us now is panama. now, panama has a very interesting economy. mostly bowlesered as being a tax have -- bolstered as being a tax haven and money laundering center. now the agreement we are voting on doesn't prohibit that but there is a separate agreement entered into by the administration that will go into effect a year from now. it doesn't require an automatic exchange of tax information between the u.s. and panama unlike other countries where we have these sorts of agreements. we must know what we want and submit detailed information to panama and panama might or might not honor that request. i.e., we submit a request for drug money laundering. they say, well, you got to be

more specific. name the drug money people's deposits. well, we don't that. fore about it. all right. we can name them. good. then panama says they won't give us the information if it's contradictory to their public public policy. i.e., the way they make a living, being the largest western atmosphere haven for the laundering of drug money. as a tax haven and also terrorist money in recent cases. we're going to facilitate that with this agreement. somehow a country with 3.5 million people, about the same size as my state but a much lower, you know, income per capita, has 400,000 corporations domiciled there. almost one for every panamanian. no, these aren't really domiciled there. they are very conveniently avoiding our laws, the laws of

other advanced nations around the world. was that three minutes? mr. michaud: i yield the gentleman an additional 30 seconds. mr. defazio: thanks. as i said yesterday, the noted economist, joseph stiglitz, said our agriculture will displace agriculture in colombia, driving people to produce more coke. don't worry. right next door the colombian drug lords will be able to deposit their money, not worry about the u.s. finding out about it, right next door in panama. these are a series of great trade agreements. the speaker pro tempore: the time of the gentleman has expired. who seeks recognition? the gentleman from texas. mr. brady: madam speaker, proud to yield one minute to a freshman lawmaker who represents a region of texas where international trade means jobs, i recognize -- i yield to

mr. canseco. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from texas is recognized for one minute. mr. canseco: madam speaker, i rise in strong support of the panama free trade agreement. like the colombian agreement, this agreement has been pending for far too long and i thank the leadership of chairman brady, dreier and camp. . at a time when unemployment is hovering above 9%, this will be a shot in the arm to help the u.s. economy. the international trade commission's analysis shows the panama agreement will boost u.s. exports to panama for key products between 9% and 145%. this will mean thousands of new job here's at home the commerce department has estimated that every $1 billion in exports creates 6,000 new jobs. this will been fit all sectors

of the u.s. economy, from financial services to manufacturing. it does so by leveling the playing field for american exports who currently face tariffs up to 260%. panama exports face chirchally no export -- tariffs in the united states. this is about the economic freedom of the american people to be able to have -- thank you. mr. brady: i yield the gentleman 15 seconds. mr. canseco: this is about the economic freedom of the american people to have a wide array of choices an pay less for those choices because of the power of trade an competition. thank you. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. who seeks recognition? the gentleman from maine. mr.my shaud: is the chairman read -- mr. my shaud: is the chairman red -- mr. michaud: is

the chairman ready to close. mr. brady: yes, sir, i am. mr. michaud. -- mmichaud: thank you. the speaker: the gentleman is recognized up to six minutes. mr. michaud:: thank you, madam speaker. on the house floor today we are considering three free trade agreement the f.t.a. with korea, which manipulates its currency, the f.t.a. with colombia, the trade union murder capital of the world and the f.t.a. with panama which as the highest drug trade in latin america. why are we f even considering

these trade agreements? we should not be advancing the failed nafta style policy when millions of americans are still out of work. instead, we should be considering legislation that will create jobs here at home. the american people are pretty clear in 2008, when they voted for hope and change, and they're even clearer in 2010, when they voted in a new generation of lawmakers to set washington straight. beth -- both times, americans voted against the inside the beltway perspective and for representatives and a president they thought would take the country in a different direction. both times, despite the signal from the american people, the white house and congress have ignored them.

washington remains as beholden to wall street and as detached from main street as ever. in a poll done by nbc and "the wall street journal" last year, the majority of americans said that they thought the f.t.a.'s had been bad for the country. given that they are so unpopular, why on earth would the president send these agreaments up to congress right now? well, you only have to look at the president's economic advisors to find out. since elected, the president has surrounded himself with advisors from wall street banks with c.e.o.'s, from companies that don't pay taxes, and with staffers who pushed the nafta-style trade agreement under clinton. those advisors don't bring fresh perspectives to the white

house. they bring more of the same corporate priorities that have caused the current and previous white house administrations to turn a blind eye while the big banks played roulette with our pensions and mortgages, an then asked for a taxpayer bailout. the panama free trade agreement is another example of washington's corporate priorities. panama's g.d.p. is about $25 billion. that's about the same g.d.p. as the city of portland, maine. the entire cupry has a population of $3.4 million. we have three times as many people in the united states on unemployment lists alone and this agrement does nothing for those 14 million americans without jobs. panama simply suspect a significant market opportunity for u.s. exports. this f.t.a. won't do anything

to reduce our 9% unemployment. but, the big companies and the big banks want it, so president obama is going to give in to the washington elite once again. the working people and the middle class don't want these trade agreements. not with panama, not with korea, and not with colombia. they want good paying jobs that allow them to provide for their families. they want a government to pass laws to help get the economy going again. they don't want another nafta style trade agreement and they definitely don't want any more wall street centric, beltway based policies if the white house or congress. they want washington to wake up. and they want the hope and change that they voted for. how much clearer could the american people be?

they want policy written by citizens, not chief executives. they want leaders to listen to town halls, not wealthy tycoons and they want change, not more of the same. i call on my colleagues who were sent here in 2010 with a mandate to change to work with me -- a chance to work with me. vote against these trade deals which will cost more than $7 billion. i call on my colleagues on the democratic side to remember, we -- we have always been the party of the working people. we must vote against these nafta-style trade agreements. it's unjust, these agreements, to the american people. so i urge a no vote on all three of these trade agreements. i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from michigan. mr. levin: i yield myself the

mans of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized up to three minutes. mr. levin: let me speak first as someone who actively opposed the nafta agreement and led the effort in this house to cafta. this is, in terms of workers' rights, the opposite of nafta and cafta. what this does is to embody the basic international worker rights in the trade agreement enforcibly. peru was the breakthrough and panama continues along that pioneering path. secondly, panama, while we're here, panama acted to change its labor laws before we voted, as was true for peru. we pointed out the deficiencies in their laws and i discussed

them with the previous administration in panama, but neither it nor the bush administration was willing to make sure action occurred. now those changes have been made as to companies less than two years, those changes have been made in terms of the economic processing zones, and they have prohibited bypassing unions by direct negotiations with nonunionized workers. unfortunately, not due in colombia. look, on the tax haven, they signed the t.i.a. we asked them to to that and that's precisely what they have done. in terms of investment, this bill strengthens the present

status quo in terms of investment protections for the united states communities. so in a word, we have a bill before us that meets the requirements that we set out when we said to the bush administration we will not take up panama until changes have been made. those chames have now indeed been made in terms of worker rights, in terms of strengthening investment, in terms of ending panama as a tax haven. those changes having been made, i urge support of this f.t.a. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. the gentleman from texas. mr. brady: i'm proud to yield the balance of our time to a champion for job creation in america, the majority leader othey have house, mr. cantor.

the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for up to two and a half minutes. mr. cantor: thank you, madam speaker. i thank the gentleman from texas. madam speaker, our current economic environment has left millions of americans without the hope of a brighter future. the constant threat of tax increases and the continued threat of excessive regulations coming from this administration sends the wrong signal to our entrepreneurs, our investors, an our small business people. the very people we need to create jobs. it sends the signal that america is not open for business. and there is a sense that we may be falling behind other nations in the global marketplace. we face big challenges, but america has always stood up when times were tough. we are a country of entrepreneurs and innovators.

madam speaker, it is time to energize our small businesses and job creators and get the economy growing again. when house republicans released our plan for america's job creators, we outrained our ideas to get our economy back on track. to promote an environment for job creation and to ensure america remains the land for opportunity without raising taxes or adding to the deficit. part of that plan was passage of the free trade agreements with colombia, yes, panama, and yes, south korea, but our support for passing these agreements is not new. on december 22, 2009, i, along with other house republican leaders, wrote to president obama outlining what we called the no cost jobs plan. in that letter, we noted that passage of these trade

agreements woult, according to experts, increase exports by 1%. that 1% increase in exports equates to a quarter of a million new jobs. we noted in our letter that the only thing standing in the way of creating those jobs was for the president to submit the trade agreements to congress for approval. since then, we have repeatedly called on the president to move forward with these agreements so we can clear the way for thousands of new jobs and create an environment for economic growth. nearly two and a half years later, on october 3, the president finally submitted all three agreements. i am glad that this administration has recognized the importance of expanding market access for american companies both small and large. as majority leader, i introduce

all three agreements the very same day the president submitted them and i am pleased today that the house will approve all three agreements. by moving forward on these agreements, madam speaker, we will help manufacturers in my home state of virginia and those across the country to incrass exports and increase production. the more manufacturers produce, the more workers they need, and that means more jobs. our action today is proof that when we look for common ground and work together we can are produce results. i would also like to note that today, madam speaker, the house is acting on another bill that is part of the president's jobs plan. the house will pass the vow act, the veterans opportunity to work act. to help our soldiers and veterans with the chams of re-entering the work force.

madam speaker, there is no more time to waste. we have said over and over again that we should not let our differences get in the way of producing results and we want to find common ground so that we can work together to improve the economy. i hope today's action will encourage the senate an the president to join us in helping pass these trade agreements and other pro-growth measures to help the american people get back to work and i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. all time for debate has expired. pursuant to house resolution 425, the previous question is ordered on the bill. the question is on engrossment and third reading of the bill. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. third reading.

the clerk: united states trade promotion agreement. the speaker pro tempore: the question is on passage of the bill. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. the bill is passed. the gentleman from michigan. mr. he vip: i request the yeas and nays. the speaker pro tempore: the yeas and nays are requested. those favoring a vote by the yeas and nays will rise. the yeas and nays are ordered. pursuant to clause 8 of rule 20, further proceedings on the question will be postponed. pursuant to clause 1-c of rule 19, further consideration of h.r. 3080 will now resume. the clerk will report the title. the clerk: a bill to implement the united states-korea free trade agreement.

the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from michigan, mr. camp, rise? mr. camp: thank you, madam speaker. at this time i yield two minutes to the distinguished member of the ways and means committee, the gentleman from louisiana, dr. boustany. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from louisiana is recognized for two minutes. ms. hanabusa: thank you, madam speaker. i -- mr. boustany: i rise in support of these three agreements because they promote u.s. agreement in strategic countries around the world. also, they promote u.s. leadership. they open new markets for farmers, american farmers, ranchers and businesses. this means american jobs, good-paying american jobs. these agreements constitute a signature jobs bill, a jobs promotion bill. south korea is a critical u.s. ally in asia and one of the fastest growing economies in the world. multiple agreements have occurred throughout asia over the past few years while american workers have sat on the sidelines.

this agreement is the largest free trade agreement for the u.s. and could have an increase in our exports by $9.7 billion according to the international trade commission by lowering tariffs to goods and services. we must pass this agreement in order to gain leverage in asia and to show support for one of our key allies in asia. this expansion of u.s. engagement will serve as a platform to build further commercial relationships, creating more jobs for american workers by opening more markets. upon implementation, more than 1/3 of louisiana's exports will be duty-free and that's just a starting point. this alone will give louisiana companies a significant advantage over consumer products made in countries that don't have an f.t.a. with south korea. we know small and medium-sized businesses are the key to creating new jobs. over 18,500 companies of this size, small and medium companies, export to south korea and they will be able to grow and hire new workers here

in the united states. right here at home. these agreements are about creating jobs. in fact, president obama's estimates that the passage of these bills will create over 250,000 new jobs right here at home as a starting point. madam speaker, i urge voting to promote all of these agreements because it will promote american competitiveness and american jobs. it will promote american credibility with our trading allies. it will promote american confidence in our international engagement. it will promote american leverage as we work with our trading partners. and most importantly, it will promote american leadership in the 21st century. thank you. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. the gentleman from michigan, mr. levin. mr. levin: i yield three minutes to the gentleman from washington, ranking on trade, mr. mcdermott. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from washington is recognized for three minutes. without objection.

mr. mcdermott: mr. speaker, i rise in support of the korea free trade agreement. we should all be proud of korea. we created korea. our troops went to korea in the -- at the beginning of the korean war and saved south korea from becoming north korea. that's how the koreans look at it. i took a trip with the commerce secretary, gary locke, who's now the ambassador to china, and the koreans said we're very grateful and we want to have this relationship with you. and because we opened our markets to them they are the most successful country in asia to have an income of about $33,000.

making an agreement is making an agreement with more than a equal. from seattle we know about our regional relationship with them. they -- we are the third largest state exporter to korea. in 2010 washington state exported more than $55 billion worth of goods, more than half of all that went to asia. hundreds of thousands of jobs in my state depend on this trade relationship. so this is not something where we're going to lose jobs. i believe it's important to move ahead because i think it's equally important to move ahead right. and what is amazing is how the bush administration went into this thing and never figured out the biggest problem that it was a one-way trading operation. we said to them, send us anything you want, and they did and now we're going to go for an agreement where we are going to turn it around and say we're going to send some things to you. the bush administration ignored

that. had it not been for charlie rangel and sandy levin and the democrats, we would never have gotten them to sit down and renegotiate. they didn't want to reopen. they had actually passed it and felt bad and kind of -- because we didn't respond. but we said, no, it's not good enough. so we brought this agreement back and got an agreement that is much fairer and much more equitablely deals with our economy, particularly our automobile industry, but also beef and some other things. and this is an agreement between equals. this is not looking for cheap labor. they were that once back in the mid 1950's when we said, send us anything, they made all the textiles. they were the textile bunch. that's not what they're dealing. they're dealing with high end

exports and we have to have an agreement with them that makes it possible for us to have a level playing field. this agreement does it. and from that point of view i think this is one that everyone can support, and i urge my colleagues to support this free trade agreement with the people's republic of korea. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. the gentleman from maine. mr. michaud: thank you, madam speaker. i yield myself 15 seconds. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. michaud: in response to the two previous speakers, i just want to highlight at this time the lunch bucket i carried with me over 29 years at the paper mill. it's bad for the workers who carry a lunch bucket similar to this. at this time i'd like to yield one minute to the gentlewoman from california, ms. sanchez. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman from california is recognized for one minute.

ms. sanchez: madam speaker, i rise today to speak in opposition to this fatally flawed trade agreement. during a time when our top priority should be job creation, congress is instead considering free trade agreements that will ship more american jobs overseas. making matters worse, we need to make sure that our current trade laws are being enforced. this korea f.t.a. will allow china to dump even more cheap goods into the u.s. without paying proper duties. and we're not talking about just a couple dollars here either. they fraudulently label their products made in korea to a tune of $53 million last year. this fraud will mean lost jobs and lost revenue here in the united states. if this agreement passes, more chinese companies will ignore

our trade laws. i think what we can all agree that we should be working towards supporting our manufacturing sector, not making it easier for china to cheat us. working families in this country deserve better than this flawed agreement, and for that reason i am urging my colleagues to vote against it. thank you, and i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman's time has expired. the gentleman from michigan, mr. camp. mr. camp: thank you. at this time i yield one minute to the gentleman from texas, mr. marchant. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from texas is recognized for one minute. mr. marchant: the trade agreements create more jobs, increase exports and broaden economic growth at a time when the united states' unemployment hovers around 9%, including 8.5% in texas, engines of job growth are needed. as the independent international trade commission points out, the three trade agreements would increase u.s.

exports by $13 billion. while more jobs are good news for a country as a whole, texas in particular stands to benefit from increased trade. in today's globalized economy, texas depends more than -- more than ever on world exports. businesses in the dallas-fort worth area are positioned for big gains. d.f.w. airport, one of the nation's leading trade gateways, already handles almost 60% of international air cargo in texas. the trade agreements will increase shipments of goods from d.f.w. to one of the most lucrative latin america and asian markets. they have five direct flights every week to south korea. madam speaker, i'm in support of the trade agreements. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired.

the gentleman from michigan, mr. levin. mr. levin: i now yield two minutes to another distinguished member of our committee, mr. blumenauer of the great state of oregon. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from oregon is recognized for two minutes. mr. blumenauer: thank you. unbalanced the package of measures moving forward is a constructive balance for the country and my state of oregon. the people i represent will increase sales of machinery, agricultural products. this in turn will lead to increased activity at our ports. beef exports will help our state's farmers and ranchers. engineering, design, legal sector all will increase. the free trade agreement means jobs for oregonians. some people have complained this process took too long, but i commend the administration and particularly my colleague, mr. levin, who didn't wish -- rush to approved trade deals that weren't good enough. dramatic improvements have been made to the korean free trade agreement where blatant unfairness to american

automobile sales in korea have been addressed. indeed, this agreement is supported by the american workers who make cars. and i commend mr. levin for his untiring efforts. in total, these agreements represent improvements that we can build upon but do not signal we can relax our effort. there is more that can be done. we need to ensure the benefits of trade are more widely distributed and the spirit with which we discuss today that they are in fact enforced. i've been encouraged to the renewed commitment to use the tools as they're supposed to be. i'm pleased the senate acted on chinese currency manipulation and that the administration's decision to impose tariffs on the illegal chinese activity in the tire market was sustained by the w.t.o. i look forward to helping ensure a continued focus on appropriate trade enforcement. our economy has grown increasingly interdependent around the world, especially in oregon. our best efforts are needed to make sure we realize the

promise of trade is not a one-way street. the years spent to improve these agreements was an important step in that direction. thank you and i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. the gentleman from maine. mr. michaud: thank you, madam speaker. the korea trade agreement is bad for workers who carry a lunch bucket like this one. at this time i'd like to yield 1 1/2 minutes to the gentleman from north korea, mr. kissell -- north carolina. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from north carolina is recognized for 1 1/2 minutes. . mr. sis el: i rise in strong opposition -- mr.cy sell: north -- mr. -- mr. kissell: if you look at our trade receive did you have to figure out we don't know how to get our exports higher than our

imports. i want to talk about the textile industry. i spent 27 years of my life working in sex tile -- textiles. the only mistake the americans made was that their dream could be fulfilled in an industry our government decided to give away in trade deals. now we're at it again this will eliminate around 40,000 textile jobs. how much more can one industry be asked to give? they give good, solid jobs and once again we give those jobs away. we heard last week the average american working family is now effectively down to a standard of living of the mid 1990's. i simply ask this question. how much more of the american dream of our merp working families should they have to give up, have to delay, until we figure out how to get this right, until we quit rying to give our jobs away to other parts of the world and concentrate on this great american economy and make it here in america.

i yield back my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. the gentleman from michigan, mr. camp. mr. camp: i would note that in country we was trade agreements with, we have a surplus in manufacturing exports. with that, i yield to the gentleman from georgia, such time as he may consume. the speaker: the wrelt is recognized. mr. westmoreland: we have been blessed to have a robust manufacturing industry, we have kia motors and a large textile presence in my district. i would like to ask the chairman to enter into a colloquy. mr. camp: i would be glad to. mr. westmoreland: mr. chairman, what will the congress do to make sure no jobs are lost due to the free trade ageement? mr. camp: the agreement includes a robust safeguard that allows the united states to raise tariffs if imports from south korea surge.

it includes a number of provision to prevent shipment from china and other countries to ensure that u.s. countries are competing only against south korean imports. third, we use a yarn forward rule of origin requiring that yarn production and all operations forward happen in south korea or the united states. the agreement will open up significant new commercial opportunities for u.s. textile and apparel exporters. south korea is the 10th largest market for textiles. it's estimated that tex -- textile exports will crean 85% to 92% and apparel exports will increase 39% -- 39 million to 45 million, 129 focht 147%. u.s. textile exporters are at a

diadvantage vis-a-vis european textile and apparel exporters. as a result of the e. pumplet-south korea f.t.a. entering into force, e.u. textile and apparel exporters face an avepblg tariff of just .1%. mr. westmoreland: further, mr. chairman, what has the ways and means committee done to ensure textiles from china do not illegal enter the u.s. through cree in a? -- korea? mr. camp: we are working with u.s. customs and the koreans to address this problem. in addition, u.s. customs an south korean customs have worked closely to develop state of the art procedures including advanced risk management techniques. for example, textile products are automatically characterized as high risk and subject to greater scrutiny. it also emphasizes

textile-specific trade protection. they are required to share information about textile manufacturers in south korea, including capacity, suppliers and machinery. this allows us to flag suspicious shipments and companies. it allows u.s. customs to send inspectors to south korea to conduct on site verification. these inspectors are allowed to make unannounced visits and if the south korean firm allows -- refuses to allow them to inspect, we can suspend preferential tariffs for that company. we maintain a liaison who focuses closely on these issues. south korea has dramatically increased resources to address transshipment including tasking

157 customs employees to work excollusively to verify country of origin information for products going to countries with which korea has a trade agreement. i'll continue to work with them to make sure it remains a high priority. mr. westmoreland: i thank the gentleman and i appreciate your commitment to closing trade loopholes that have negatively impacting u.s. textiles including taking up the textile security act which i'm sure the chairman would do. it's my understanding that korea's tariffs are subject to a phi-year phaseout but the u.s. tariffs will go to zero immediately, allowing free entry for korean textiles. what is your committee doing and will do to ensure an equal playing field for u.s. textiles in korea an there's not a flood of korean textile into the u.s.

market. mr. camp: actually the tariff asymmetry works the other way around by value, 73% of u.s. textile exports to south korea would receive duty fee treatment immediately upon entering boo force. in contrast, only 5% -- 52% of south korean exports to the u.s. by value would become duty-free immediately. it's worth noting that south korean exports to the united states have fallen by 50% over the last phi years while u.s. exports to south korea have nearly doubled. mr. west morland: and i ask the chairman, will you work with the textile caucus to ensure the provisions of the free trade agreements are not used as a model in future free trade agreements? mr. camp: i look forward to continuing to work together with you and your colleagues in the textile caucus to work to address your concerns and ensure that customs adequately

prioritizes its trade enforcement responsibility particularly as it relates to this. mr. west morlan: also i would like to insert two articles into the record. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. westmoreland: i yield back. the speaker: the gentleman from michigan, mr. levin. mr. levin: i yield 10 seconds to the gentleman. mr. mcdermott: in a letter to support u.s. trade law, the ambassador, the trade representative, said there's nothing in the trade agreement that would weaken the international rules or u.s. laws to address unfairly traded imports that injure u.s. industry and workers. the specific trade remedies provisions you raised are carefully crafted by our negotiators to mean that they will not adversely affect the efficacy of relief under u.s.

anti-dumping laws. ski unanimous consent to enter this into the record. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. levin: i yield two minutes to the gentleman from wisconsin. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for two minutes. >> madam speaker, i rise in strong support of the u.s.-korea trade agreement as i have for the colombia and panama agreements as well. this is another example of president obama and his team at usti inheriting what i thought were three pretty good trade agreements when they assumed office but realizing there was room for improvement. mr. kind: we got that crucial improvement with korea over two vital sectors of the u.s. economy, automobiles and beef. more specifically for the state of wisconsin which is the largest cranberry producing state in the nation, this enables us to get back in the game with meaningful exports into the korean market. each day we wait to pass this

agreement, chea lie captures more market share. it's also true for one of the largest manufacturers an therefore one of the largest employers in my district in western wisconsin, located in my hometown of lacrosse. right now the goods and products they're making at that lacrosse plant faces an 8% tariff barrier. with the passage of this agreement that goes down to zero. that's the point of all these trade afwreems. wear leveling the playing field for our workers and businesses so they can compete more effectively and fairly in gaining greater market access to korea, to colombia, and to panama. these won't be the panaceas to the job creation we need at home but they are important steps in the right direction. they all contain vital international labor and environmental standards in the bulk of the agreement fully enforcement with -- enforceable with other provisions. that's been a significant

improvement as far as the elevation of standards globally and the levels of the playing field for our businesses and workers at home which cannot be discounted. again, i commend the members of the ways and means committee, the leadership there, but especially president obama and his usti team in taking these trade agreements, improving upon them and making sure that when the open for business sign is over the united states of america, so we can pursue a meaningful economic engagement throughout the rest of the world. i do subscribe to carnell hua's theory on trade. may i have 30 seconds? mr. levin: 15 seconds. mr. kind spg i thank the gentleman. -- mr. kind: i thank the gentleman. he stated trade is more than just goods and products crossing borders because when that occurs, armies don't. this is just a tool in our economic arsenal and part of the tools we need for economic growth in this country.

the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from maine. mr.my -- mr. michaud: i yield two minutes to the gentleman from oregon, mr. defazio. the speaker: the gentleman is recognized for two minutes. mr. defazio: we talked about the reduction in tariff exports, that will be blown away if they manipulate their currency and korea is one of only three nations on earth identified as a currency manipulators by our own u.s. terror treasury. does this adeprement preclude currency manipulation? it does not. they remake their val added taxes to all their exports. build a car in korea, don't pay taxes in korea. build a car in the u.s., we cant rebate the taxes under

these current laws and when the u.s. car gets to the border of korea, they pay a 10% tax. we'll export autos to korea if they're 20% cheaper than those produced by cheaper labor in korea, not very likely. but let's say we could. if you buy a u.s. car and you're a korean citizen, they'll audit your taxes. most employers do not allow owners offord automobiles, which are mostly luxury automobiles over there, there are very few foreign automobiles, to have parking spaces at work. and korea does not buy very many cars. they have a 65% mix, 65% of the cars they produce are exported. this is not about u.s. exports to korea. it's a platform for them to send us stuff here. that's cheaper and displace american jobs. even the u.s. international trade council, the wildest cheerleader in the world for

these failed agreements said we'll have a bigger deficit in autos. these are the same people who said we'll have a huge trade surplus with mexico. oops, they were wrong. they can't even pretend we'll do well with this. $1 ppt 7 more auto exporters from korea to the u.s. and that's with the cheerleaders talking. imagine what the real numbers will be like. we're talking about 160,000 to 200,000 u.s. jobs, kiss the remained ore they have auto industry and auto parts good-bye with this agreement. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from michigan. mr. camp: i would note that this is endorsed by the big three automakers. i yield one minute to the gentlewoman from kansas, ms. jenkins. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman is recognized. ms. jenkin: thank you, mr. chairman, for yielding and for your leadership on this issue. many americans believe congress

can't agree on anything. if there's one thing washington can agrea on, it's that we're in a jobs crisis and we should be doing everything in our power to create an environment that encourages the private sector to thrive and create jobs. if we are looking to make a dramatic and immediate impact on our job market, we need to look no further than he south korean trade agreement. ratifying this deal will secure at least 70,000 american jobs as we increase our exports by more than $10 billion, adding $12 billion to our g.d.p. this agreement also means jobs for kansans, our agriculture sector is looking at a multibillion dollar expansion and our processed foods, chemical and transportation industries that do well over $150 million of business with south korea each year are primed to expand further under this deal.

and our focus is on jobs, jobs, jobs, let's have this south korea trade agreement and get americans back to work. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman's time has expired. the gentleman from michigan, mr. levin. mr. levin: i now yield to another member of our committee, mr. crowley of new york, three minutes. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from new york is recognized for three minutes. mr. crowley: thank you, madam speaker. i rise in support of this agreement between the united states and korea. i especially want to thank my colleague, mr. levin of michigan, for his tireless efforts to improve the agreement along with chairman camp and congressman brady of texas in a bipartisan way. a lot of credit for the content of this agreement should also go to president obama. the bush administration was willing to submit an agreement that heavily favored korea, but the obama administration held out until we got a better deal,

a more fair deal, a more fair agreement. for a long time our roadways have been home to cars named hyundai. now because of this agreement, south korean roadways will see more american cars on them. it's only right that fords and chevies have the same access that hyundai have here in america and this agreement will not only break the barriers for american car manufacturers, american services and goods such as insurance, legal, finance, television and movies will now be available in south korea. korean services companies have always had the right to operate here, but this agreement is about making sure that american companies have the same ability to operate in south korea. that's good news for american businesses and good news for american workers.

for a state like mine that depends so much on the service industries, it's important that we're -- that we are able to export our products throughout the world. it's no secret that the number one reason to support this agreement, though, is because it tears down barriers for u.s. exporters and will create jobs right here in the united states. but the number two reason is just as important. i have often discussed with my korean american constituents back in queens and the bronx the importance of a strong south korea. this is as much about diplomacy. this is as much about our geopolitics. south korea is in an area of the worldes that dangerous and unpredictable. america needs strong allies in this reason and this agreement

acknowledges south korea as a friend and stall wart ally of the american government and more importantly of the american people. since we stood shoulder to shoulder during the korean war against the advancement of communism to our joint efforts today to stop terrorism throughout the world, south korea has been a true ally of the united states. this agreement sends a message to countless other countries around the world. if you want to be treated like south korea, act like south korea. south korea, if i can have an additional 15 seconds. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. crowley: south korea has a strong labor -- strong labor and environmental laws. south korea is committed to representative democracy, and south korea recognizes that it's a two-way street that must benefits americans as well as south korea.

i strongly urge passage of this agreement and i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. the gentleman from maine. mr. michaud: thank you. i now yield two minutes to the gentlewoman from connecticut, ms. delauro. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman from connecticut is recognized for two minutes. ms. delauro: i rise to voice my strong opposition to this trade agreement with south korea. like the two other nafta-style trade agreement before us, we know this deal will lead to the outsourcing of american jobs, potentially displacing 150,000 u.s. workers according to the economic policy institute. it will provide chinese businesses engage in the transshipment of goods through third countries and easy opportunity to take advantage of carrier freights that are intended for south korean goods. according to the korea customs service, the quantity of products illegally labeled,

made in korea" doubled from 2008 to 2010. these trans-shipments come from southeast asia and other nations. they have a history of transshipping goods to the u.s. through other countries so they can avoid duties that are levied against them for illegal trading practices. korea's proximity and 16 ports, including the world's fifth largest makes them a usual target for chinese companies. investigations by u.s. customs in recent years have resulted in indictments and convictions for a variety of duty evasion schemes that hurt america including cases involving steel wired garment hang arse and honey. -- hangars and honey. -- hangers and honey.

we can expect an increase of cheap chinese goods into our market, again to the detriment of u.s. workers, if they was this agreement. you know, millions of jobs have been lost or displaced because of our trade deficit with china, and chinese products from chicken to toys have posed serious public health concerns. what american families need right now is ceal job creation. we should be -- real job creation. we should be focusing on policies that puts jobs here at home that cannot be outsourced. and what we do nod need are short sided -- do not need are shortsighted trade deals. i urge my colleagues, stand up for struggling americans. i oppose this agreement. i ask unanimous consent to insert in the record a letter i received from the nationality association of machinists in connecticut. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman's time has expired. the gentleman from michigan,

mr. camp. mr. camp: i yield one minute to mr. tiberi of ohio. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for one minute. mr. tiberi: i want to see folks in south korea driving fords, chevys and chryslers, i want to see more products sold in -- to the rest of the world stamped made in america. i support the president's effort. our chairman's effort in crafting these three agreements before us today. in fact i asked ambassador kirk earlier this year in our full committee, how many jobs did he think would be created? his estimate was 250,000 u.s. jobs that would be supported through these three agreements. in ohio, madam speaker, agriculture is still the number one industry. we believe, the trade

ambassador agrees that we should see an increase in exports to south korea and the three other countries of 55 million per year. this is about jobs, madam speaker. this is about exports. this is about leveling the playing field. i urge my colleagues to support the agreement. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. the gentleman from michigan, mr. levin. mr. levin: it's now my pleasure to yield a minute and a half to the gentleman from california, mr. costa. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from california is recognized for 1 1/2 minutes. mr. costa: thank you very much. madam speaker, i rise in support of the u.s.-korea free trade agreement as well as the panama and colombia agreements before us today. economic growth depends upon a number of factors, including growing access to foreign markets. these agreements do that. foreign goods enter our country under few restrictions, but around the world our products face product tariffs and other prohibitive barriers to trade. the current situation is neither free nor fair trade.

this changes that. the barriers are against our products. this reduces and eliminates those barriers. the pending agreements will allow american products to better compete globally and support job creation at home. that's why i support these agreements. practices no industry stands to gain more than agriculture throughout america and especially in california, the number one agricultural state in the nation. passage of these agreements with south korea means that americans growing raisins,ess pair gas, pistachios and wine will grow. many other crops including citrus, will also benefit. recognizing the agreements potential to create over 70,000 american jobs. it's been endorsed by the united auto workers, the united food and commercial workers. and many trade organizations. they will gain duty access to latin america's fastest growing economy.

it will eliminate most barriers for trade for products entering central and south america, the third largest economy, and strengthens our ties with a key ally in that region. simply put, expanding access to emerging foreign markets will boost agriculture and help californians back to work. i ask for 15 seconds. mr. levin: 15 seconds. mr. costa simply passing these agreements are not enough. we must build on the accountability to ensure these trade agreements are enforced. we cannot afford to sit on the sidelines while other countries form their own pacts with emerging markets. it means more jobs here at home for america. i ask you to support these measures. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. the gentleman from maine. mr. michaud: thank you, madam speaker. at this time i'd like to yield one minute to the gentleman from ohio, mr. ryan. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from ohio is recognized for one minute. mr. ryan: i thank the gentleman. you know, these are the same promises that we heard during nafta and during the most

favored nation trade status debate with china and we heard a lot of statistics about job creation. we don't need statistics. come to ohio. go to toledo. go to pittsburgh. go to fayetteville, new york. -- north carolina. go to youngstown, ohio. all these promises were made before and it didn't pan out. it didn't work, and these trade issues are side shows. the number one issue facing this congress is whether or not we're going to deal with china and their currency manipulation. that bill came to the floor, this floor last year. we had 99 republicans vote for it. it passed with 350 votes. it just passed the senate. we need to bring that bill to the floor and take on the beast in the middle of the room and that's the chinese and drive investment back. when we put a tariff on oil country tubular goods in china, countervailing duties and anti-dumping, we have $2

billion of investment that now came into the united states in steel mills. we know what to do. we just need the courage to do it, and so all my friends here who are going to help these multinational corporations, they're going to get the money that they made and they're going to utilize the citizens united case and they're going to invest it in your campaigns to beat you. it's time we have the courage to take on the beast and do what's right. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. the gentleman from michigan, mr. camp. mr. camp: thank you, madam speaker. i yield two minutes to a distinguish member of the ways and means committee, the gentleman from washington state, mr. reichert. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from washington is recognized for two minutes. mr. reichert: thank you, madam speaker, and thank you, chairman, for yielding. well, the beast in the room is jobs. and that's what these bills are about, jobs. you know, we need to pass these trade agreements just like president obama said, pass these trade agreements now. pass these jobs bills now.

that's what these are, jobs bills. korea alone, 70,000-plus jobs. and how does that work? well, 95% of the tariffs that we pay currently to korea disappear. they're eliminated almost immediately. what happens then? guess what, our prices go down. more demand for our goods. more demand for our goods. what does that mean? produce more product. when you produce more products, what happens? this is economy 101. you have to hire more workers. more workers to make more products. guess what, the unemployment rate goes down. that's what we need to do today. we need to come together and we know this is a bipartisan effort. we know that people have come together on both the democratic side and republican side. we know that the white house has supported these trade agreements. what happens if we don't pass these bills? we lose. the european union has already

made their agreement with korea. it went into effect on july 1. their exports to korea have already increased by 17%. we are losing market share. 95% of our market is outside of this country. we need to sell american. we need to pass these trade agreements now. we need to pass these jobs bills now. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. the gentleman from michigan, mr. levin. . mr. levin: i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker: the gentleman from maine. mr. michaud: i would like to yield one and a half minutes to the gentlewoman from illinois, ms. schakowsky. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman is recognized for one and a half minutes. ms. schakowsky: i thank you, madam speaker, and i would like to thank my colleague, congressman michaud for his tireless work to promote

responsible trade policy. i rise in strong opposition to the u.s.-south korea free trade agreement. nearly 14 million americans remape out of work and instead of considering a job creation bill, we are voting today on a trade bill that the economic policy institute estimates will cause the los of an additional 159,000 u.s. jobs this trade deal will further devastate the american manufacturing sector, which has already lost six million jobs since 1998. 55,000 factories have closed since -- in the last decade. the three bush-negotiated trade deals under consideration today are an expansion of the nafta trade model, which has decimated cities and towns across america. agreements like the korea f.t.a. have accelerated the outsourcing and offshoring,

sending american jobs and plants overseas. this trade agreement is a bad deal for american workers. trade can be a valuable tool to bolster the u.s. economy. but only if we utilize a trade model that promotes u.s. jobs. if we want to create jobs, we need to create jobs, not pass another trade agreement that will shift even more u.s. jobs abroad. thank you, mr. speaker. -- madam speaker. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman's time has expired. the gentleman from michigan, mr. camp. mr. camp: i yield two minutes to the distinguished gentleman from indiana, mr. pence. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman veck niced for two minutes. mr. pence: i ask unanimous consent to revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. pence: i thank the gentleman for yielding. madam speaker, this is a difficult time in the life of our nation. 9.1% unmoiment nationally, millions of american families are hurting.

the american people are looking to washington, d.c. more for solutions than for fights. and today, with the korea free trade agreement, with the colombia trade promotion agreement, the panama trade promotion agreement, washington, d.c., in a bipartisan way, is coming together with a solution that will help to crea ate jobs and get this economy moving again and i heartly sport it. -- heart tirly support it. -- heartityly support it. i commend my colleagues for working together to bring us to this important moment. i always believed that trade means jobs. i say with some pride that's especially true in the hoosier state. indiana is uniquely poised to take advantage of the fee trade opportunities provided in these agreements an i'm grateful for the chance to elaborate on that.

i say in christian we do two things well, we make things and we grow things. the truth is, in indiana, we do a lot more than that. but in indiana what we grow and what we build is at the heart of the hoosier economy. expanding global marks for what we make and what we grow is going to create jobs in indiana. in the city and on the farm. american farm bureau estimates that implementing these three agreements will increase agricultural exports in indiana by nearly $55 million a year, creating 500 new agricultural related jobs. the korea agreement we debate at this moment will eliminate $1.3 billion in tariffs on u.s. exports and cover many things we're known for, feed corn, soybeans, eliminate those duties, and other duties will be phased out like pork. i rise in support of these agreements because i believe

trade means jobs and america and indiana need jobs like never before. i urge my colleagues in both pears to join in this bipartisan measure and let's move this bill. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from michigan, mr. levin. mr. levin: i reserve. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from maine. many michaud: may i inquire how much time each side has? the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from maine has 11 minutes remaining, the gentleman, mr. levin has seven minutes remaining, the jell, mr. camp, has six minutes remaining. mr. michaud: i yield two minutes to the gentleman from north carolina, mr. jones. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for two minutes. mr. jones: i thank the gentleman for the time. every time a president, democrat or republican, asks congress to approve a trade deal, they give us these wildly optimistic projections of how many jobs these deals will create. sadly this adprgs -- this

administration is no different. president obama suggested that the korea free trade agreement will create 70,000 new jobs. the record shows crust how wrong that claim is. in the 1990's, president clinton suggested that nafta would create over 200,000 jobs. here's the reality. since nafta passed in december, 1993, america has lost 5.15 million jobs. lost 5.15 million manufacturing jobs. 384,000 of these jobs were lost in my home state of north carolina. in 2005, president bush claimed that cafta was a pro-jobs bill that would stem the tide of u.s. manufacturing jobs losses but since cafta passed in september of 2005, america has lost 2.4 million manufacturing

jobs. here we have roughly 9.1% unemployment in this country, due in no small part to the washington elite jamming these job destroying trade agreements down our throats. americans do not want free trade. a recent nbc-"wall street journal" poll showed that 63 -- a recent nbc/"wall street journal" poll showed that 63% of americans believe free trade cost american jobs. 61% of tea party supporters believe that trade agreements have hurt this nation. it's time we started listening to the will of the american people and doing what is in the best interest of the american people, not in the best interest of the foreign nationals who desperately want to take our jobs, madam speaker, i hope my colleagues on both sides of the aisle would show their true american colors and vote no, no, no on these three trade agreements. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired.

the gentleman from michigan, mr. camp. mr. camp: i yield two minutes to a distinguished member of the wames committee, the gentleman from illinois, mr. roskam. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for two minutes. mr. roskam: madam speaker, as the public is listening to this, i think they're collectively going, shew! finally there's something going on in congress, finally there's something going on with the other body, finally there's something going on with the white house that has common ground. that's this. no cost job creation. for my home state, the proof is in the pudding. this means it's going to help 145,000 illinois jobs now that are deathered within 650 companies that are dealing with exports. this deal helps them. 25% of all manufacturing jobs in my home state of illinois are related to exports.

let's face it, 95% of the world's consumers, madam speaker, live outside of the united states, so you know what this trade deal does? this says game on. the u.s. can compete, give us a fair playing field and game on. we can compete. these were hardheaded, hard-nosed negotiations led by chairman camp and the white house and ranking member levin and others. these were tough deals that were put together that were not just weak handshakes. this was staring down opponents and finally coming to commom -- common ground and putting something together with a great deal of possibility. a great deal of promise in a country that is desperate, i mean absolutely desperate for solutions. and this is a remedy. this is a way for us to move forward. it's important from a stra teemic point of view. we've got one of our nation's best friends poised in asia,

the 10th largest economy in the world a country that has moved from the devastation of the korean war, that has transcended all of that and is now a donor nation an we've got the opportunity to be in a unique and strategic relationship with them. this is our opportunity to move forward. i think we need to support these, all of these f.t.a.'s and i urge their passage. thank you, madam speaker. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. does the gentleman from michigan, mr. levin, wish to continue reserving? mr. levin: i do. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from maine. mr. michaud: i would like to yield one and a half minutes to the gentlewoman from ohio who has fought harder and longer for fair trade than any member i've served with, ms. kaptur. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman is recognized for one and a half minutes. ms. kaptur: i thank my dear

colleague, mr. michaud, who has fought equally hard and i'm proud to stand here on behalf of the communities and workers an businesses of our country that want to compete on a level playing field. the problem with our trade policies is we export more jobs than products. the gentleman talks about possibility. i don't want possibility. i want results. and when you look at what's happened over the last quarter semplery, we don't have any balanced trade accounts. they're all in the red. it snuffs out economic growth. didn't anybody here take math? look at the balance sheet. it's all negative. this is korea today. all negative. it's been negative. it's already negative. what difference does this deal make? it only says maybe, maybe korea will allow us to sell more than 7,450 cars in their market, when they're selling half a million here already.

isn't reciprocity, shouldn't that be at the heart of our trade deals? we've got a half trillion dollar trade deficit. how many times do you have to be hit over the head before you say, you know what, this isn't working. soybeans aren't enough. cranberries aren't enough. look at the outsourcing of america from coast to coast. our people's wages are going down. their standard of living is going down. their jobs have been outsourced, they're losing their homes, unemployment is stuck. g.d.p. isn't rising. is anybody here listening? is anybody paying attention? this is just another example of powerful washington elites being totally out of step with main street and the american people. i'm proud of the tea partiers who are out there organizing an i'm proud of the occupy wall street people because they're saying, you folks are out of step up here in washington. pay attention to what's happening on main street. i oppose this agreement with korea as well as colombia and

panama and ask this congress to have some real common sense and move to trade balance rather than trade deficit. the speaker pro tempore: the jerusalem's time has expired. the gentleman from michigan, mr. camp. mr. camp: i yield one minute to the distinguished gentleman from texas, mr. canseco. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is reck nighed for one minute. mr. canseco: madam speaker, i rise in strong support of the south korea free trade agrea, the most significant free trade agreament the united states has negotiated in more than 16 years. i thank the leadership of our chairman, mr. camp, mr. brady, and mr. dreier in this regard. the international trade commission's analysis shows that the south korean agreement will increase u.s. exports to south korea by at least $9.7 billion annually. the tariff cuts alone will add $10.1 billion to the u.s. economy annually and u.s. exports to south korea will

increase by 30% more than imports from south korea. the mick active resulting from this agreament will mean thousands of new jobs here at home. the commerce department has stipted that every $1 billion in exports creates 6,000 new jobs and in particular the south korean agreement is especially beneficial for agriculture. in the 23rd district of texas, i have the privilege to represent many agricultural produresers. this would be a huge win for american farmers an ranchers by ensuring that our competitors, who are also seeking trade agreements with korea, are not at an advantage. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. the gentleman from -- does the gentleman yields additional time? the gentleman from michigan, mr. levin. mr. levin: could you give us each our remaining time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from michigan, mr. levin, has eight minutes. the gentleman from michigan, mr. camp, has 2003 and a half

minutes, and the gentleman from maine has 7 1/2 minutes. mr. camp has three and a half minutes. mr. levin: three and a half. so i'm going to close, what order should we use? mr. michaud, myself, then mr. camp? i think that's the appropriate order. mr. camp: i believe i have two more speakers, we're just trying to locate them. the speaker pro tempore: does the gentleman from maine have additional speakers. mr. michaud: i re-- mr. camp: i reserve. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from michigan, mr. camp, reserves. who seeks recognition? mr. camp: madam speaker, our speakers are not here so why

don't we begin with closing? the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from maine is recognized for 7 1/2 minutes. mr. michaud: madam speaker, i yield myself such time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. michaud: i rise today as a former mill worker who posted time clock for over 29 years at the great northern pamer company in maine. what i'm seeing firsthand is devastation that these free trade agreement can do to our communities. this adwreement is the most economically significant since nafta and its consequences for americans, middle class, will be enormous. since nafta we have lost more than five million manufacturing

jobs and we've seen more than 50,000 factories close in the last 10 years alone. the korea f.t.a. will bring more of the same. it will cost us more manufacturing jobs, it will shut down more factories and it will ship more jobs overseas. all at a time of 9% unemployment , when the american middle class can least afford it. my colleagues have already highlighted the many reasons to oppose the korea f.t.a. but i want to highlight two of those issues again. first, it does nothing to protect the u.s. in the face of korea's currency manipulation, and second, this agreement isn't just a giveaway to korea, it's also a giveaway to china. korea has a history of manipulating its currency to boost its exports.

once in 19 once in 1988 and twice in 1989, the u.s. treasury department officially labeled korea a currency manipulater. even though the treasury stopped officially identifying currency manipulaters in their february and may report of 2011 they stated explicitly and i quote, korea should adopt a greater degree of exchange rate flexibility and less intervention, end of quote. the international monetary fund agrees. in august of this year the i.m.f. stated that the waun was undervalued by 5% to 20%. the fact is, korea manipulates its currency. our own treasury department recognizes it. but the f.t.a. does nothing to protect american businesses and workers from it.

you only have to look at mexico's 1994 devaluation of the peso to see how effectively an undervalued currency can wipe out an f.t.a.'s benefits. our trade balance with mexico has never been positive since. without a provision to protect us from the undervaluation, korea's he can ports will continue to be cheaper than our own exports. this korean advantage will wipe out the f.t.a.'s tariff benefits for american companies and cost american workers their jobs. candidate barack obama recognized this threat, claiming that as president he would, and i quote, insist that our trade deals include prohibition against illegal subsidy and currency manipulation. end quoast.

-- of quote. but this f.t.a. includes no such prohibition at all. and second, this agreement is not just good for korea, it's great for china too. today we're actually voting on an f.t.a. that will be an outright boone for china's auto parts sector. the agreements rules of origin -- agreement's rules of origin require that only 35% of the korea content value be put from korea or the u.s. we have two f.t.a.'s with car-producing countries, nafta and the australia f.t.a. and the australia f.t.a., the content requirements are 50%. and in the nafta the content requirements are 62.5%. korea's car production in 2010 was almost equal to that of canada and mexico combined, yet the korea f.t.a. contains no

requirements -- or contains requirements that are much lower than nafta. by allowing the 65% of a car content value to come from a third country where opening the door for that 65% to come from guess who? china. as a result these rules of origin will be devastating to american auto parts industry. the u.s. auto supply chain is already facing challenges from china. according to the commerce department 2010 report titled, "on the road," china auto parts exports to the u.s. have increased 43% from 2004 to 2009. and they're expected to account for an increased share of the u.s. auto parts in the future. in fact, commerce predicts that many auto part companies will continue to move production to china in an effort to reduce cost and remain competitive.

if this f.t.a. passes, that's not a prediction, that's a guarantee. i've already mentioned the fact that we have lost more than 50,000 factories since 2001. before voting today, i urge you to imagine how many more factories will close if we were to pass this agreement. and to think about the devastation that will be brought to those towns when that happens. i oppose it because it will devastate our manufacturing sector at a time when we need to rebuild it. i oppose it because this president promised hope and change, not more of the same. i oppose it because my hometown, unemployment is more than 28%. i oppose it because i want to create jobs in the united states , not south korea and definitely not in china. as a former mill worker and on

behalf of america's middle class, i urge my colleagues to oppose the korea f.t.a. agreement. at this time i'd ask unanimous consent to insert into the record a letter from the afghanistan c.i.o. in opposition to all -- affle croix in opposition to all -- afl-cio in opposition to all free trade agreements. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. michaud: i'd like to yield to the gentleman from north carolina, mr. kills, for the purpose of a unanimous consent request. -- mr. kissel, for the purpose of a unanimous consent request. mr. kissell: i thank my friend for yielding. madam speaker, i ask unanimous consent -- unanimous consent to insert into the record 27,000 petitions from american textile workers, pressing opposition to

the korean free trade agreement. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. >> mr. speaker, i rise to ask unanimous consent to insert into the record congresswoman sutton from ohio. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. ms. sutton: madam speaker, i ask unanimous consent to insert into the record a letter from the afl-croix on korea's labor violations. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. michaud: i ask unanimous consent for congresswoman from california, ms. sanchez, to submit into the record. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. ms. sanchez: madam speaker, i ask unanimous consent to insert into the record a resolution from the league of united latin american citizens expressing opposition to the free trade agreement. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. michaud: thank you, madam speaker. i would now like to yield to the congressman from pennsylvania, mr. critz, for the purpose of asking for unanimous consent. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. critz: i rise to ask unanimous consent to insert into the record a letter from the united steel workers in opposition to the korea free trade agreement.

the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. michaud: madam speaker, i'd yield to the congresswoman from maine, ms. pingree, for the purpose of asking for a unanimous consent. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. ms. pingree: thank you very much. madam speaker, i ask unanimous consent to insert into the record a letter from the building construction trades department of the afl-cio in opposition to all three f.t.a.'s. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. michaud: i'd like to yield to the representative from north carolina, mr. jones, for the purpose of unanimous consent. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. jones: madam speaker, i rise to ask unanimous consent to insert into the record two letters opposing the korean free trade agreement, one from the american manufacturing trade action coalition and another from the united states industrial fabric institute. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. michaud: madam speaker, i'd like to yield for the purpose of unanimous consent to mr.ly pip i ask from illinois. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. -- mr. lipinski from illinois. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. lipinski: i rise in opposition to this job-killing trade bill and ask unanimous consent to insert into the record a letter from the international federation for

professional and technical engineers in opposition to the korea f.t.a. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. michaud: thank you. madam speaker, i'd like to yield to the gentlewoman from north carolina, ms. foxx, for the purpose of a unanimous consent. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. ms. foxx: madam speaker, i rise to ask unanimous consent to insert into the record a statement from the national council of textile organizations in opposition to the korea free trade agreement. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. michaud: mr. speaker, i'd like to yield to the congresswoman from california, ms. woolsey, for the purpose of a unanimous consent. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. ms. woolsey: madam speaker, i ask unanimous consent to insert into the record a letter from the international union of painters and allied trades in opposition to the korea f.t.a. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. michaud: mr. speaker, i'd like to ask unanimous consent for the purpose of a unanimous consent to ms. kaptur to enter remarks into the record. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. ms. kaptur: madam speaker, i ask

unanimous consent to insert into the record a letter from the hardest working workers in america, the international brotherhood of boiler makers, ironship builders, black smith and helpers. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. michaud: i'd like to yield to the congresswoman from ohio, ms. sutton, for the purpose of a unanimous consent request. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. ms. sutton: madam speaker, i ask unanimous consent to insert into the record a letter from the energy brotherhood of electrical workers in opposition to the free trade agreement. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. michaud: madam speaker, i'd like to yield to the gentleman from pennsylvania, mr. critz, for the purpose of a unanimous consent request. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. critz: madam speaker, i ask unanimous consent to insert into the record a letter from the international long shore and warehouse union in opposition to the korea free trade agreement. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. the gentleman from maine has 30 seconds remaining. mr. michaud: i yield back 0 seconds. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. the gentleman from michigan, mr. levin. mr. levin: i yield myself the remaining time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for eight minutes.

mr. levin: this is an important discussion and i want to be clear what is really at stake here. if the automotive industry of this country but it's more than that. there's a basic principle involved in the korea f.t.a. issue. and that is whether we will replace one-way trade with two-way trade. when this was negotiated by the bush administration, it failed to take the most important step relating to korea. they were shipping hundreds of thousands of cars to the united states. we were shipping at that time less than 10,000.

so this indeed, while it mainly involved automotive and that was 75% of our deficit, it was even more than that. opening up markets for our goods produced in the united states of america, this was a make it in america issue. and there was a korean iron curtain against our products, by the way not only automotive but refrigeraters and others. the number one priority of the koreans was to eliminate the 2.5% u.s. tariff. because if you ship 600,000, 700,000 cars, that's a lot of money. we said to the administration,

no way. we were not going to let the korean free trade agreement be approved if it continued to embody one-way trade. the korean ambassador met with mr. rangel and myself often and the trade minister and they said, we aren't going to talk about it. we said, well, if you don't talk there'll be no agreement. then what happened was that the new administration came into being, the oba maw administration, and it began to work on this issue. and what happened was -- the obama administration and it began to work on this issue. there were major changes.

instead of the tariff on most vehicles immediately, it was delayed until the fifth year. on trucks, it was delayed for eight years, to give time to make sure that the one-way street game became a two-way street. that has been accomplished. to make entirely sure of this, there were provisions to make sure they could no longer use their tax provisions and their environmental standards to keep out our products. and to make it even safer, we made sure that there was a safeguard, so if there's a surge of automotive products into the united states, we could defend ourselves. that was unique. and that's why the big three

are saying the following, i quote -- as representatives of the largest eblings porting sector this will open up an important market for chrysler, ford, and g.m. exports. our companies make the best cars and trucks on the road and we are excited for the export opportunity this agreement represents. that's why the u.a.w. has indicated its support, because workers making their cars will now be able to see that their cars can be shipped to korea. and ford has said they're going to use korea as a base to penetrate with american products the markets of the rest of asia. so that's why this is all about. now, it won't be china getting into the u.s. it will be the u.s. getting

into korea. that's really what this is all about. i want to say a word about the issue relating to -- relating to issues of transshipment. we insisted in the f.t.a. that there be provisions relating to transshipment. i want to quickly refer -- refer to them. if customs has any doubt about a shipment, it can require korean exporters to provide documentation showing that the goods qualify for f.t.a. treatment. if a korean exporter refuses or the document is not acceptable, customs can deny f.t.a. treatment to the good. u.s. customs can also do site visits, this is something different to korean factlies --

factories to verify information and if our customs officials are denied access or the visit shows problems, they can deny entry to the korean goods and exporters who inteppingsally or repeatedly make false claims are subject to penalties. i have a letter embodying this from u.s. customs and border protection. i ask insertion in the record. i also ask insertion the letter if the automobile association and the u.a.w. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, so ordered. mr. levin: i also want to quote the letter from the statement from the motor an equipment manufacturers association. it says as follows. the pending f.t.a.'s offer real opportunities for parts manufacturers an our employees in two of the fastest growing regions, asia pacific and south america. we can ill afford to neglect these and other markets as key

competitors. i ask that this letter be inserted in the record. so that's what the issue is here today. we face a one-way market with impenetrable barriers. these are now being torn down. this is a jobs bill. this is a jobs bill. we have to be able to compete and our auto industry can now compete. in order to be able to compete effectively, we have to tear down the marks of other cupries and make sure our markets are not only open to them but their markets are open to us. we worked very hard to make this happen. it wasn't an easy job.

there were times when the administration perhaps, the new one, the obama administration, was going to settle for something less than was necessary. we pressed, we pressed effectively. the obama administration rose to the occasion and in the end said to korea, you must agree to open the market, or we will not send this agreement, this revised agreement, to the u.s. congress. this revised agreement has now been sent here. i urge its support. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. for what purpose does the gentleman from texas rise? mr. brady: -- >> i ask unanimous consent to insert into the record a letter in opposition to the agreement and ask unanimous consent to

place in the record a statement for my support for assistance and opposing the colombia and panama fee trade agreement. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. the gentleman from michigan. mr. camp: i yield myself the plans of my time and yield to the gentleman from california. >> this agreement will break down trade barriers and level the playing feld for 19,000 small and medium-sized businesses here in the crites and the farmers here who export into this market. it means 280,000 new american jobs and frankly, it means $10 billion in new exports and let's remember this, europe has this trade agreement. it went into effect on july 1. they've seen a 17% increase in their exports into the market in south korea at our expense. why? because frankly u.s. exports to korea currently face an average

tariff of 12.2%. mr. royce: it's frankly 49% for agricultural products. if we can bring that down, their tariffs are higher than ours. if we can bring that down, we can get that market share. we can increase that trade and develop these jobs and the agreement removed the barriers on -- and provides transparency, provides property rights, it has rules on competition, that makes u.s. businesses much more competitive in korea. it gives them access into that market. i yield back to the gentleman from michigan. mr. camp: i do want to touch on some points raised by mr. levin. we did work closely together on the supplemental agreement last year work the administration work automakers, with autoworkers. that's incorporated in the legislation before us today. it does address key tariff and

nontariff barriers, including provisions to ensure they cannot use a regulatory system or process to block our exports. the international trade commission estimates that the removal of nontariff barriers aloan will add an additional, between $48 million an $66 million in exports, in addition to the $190 million in exports expected from lower korean tariffs on autos alone. inaction on the korean trade agreement has allowed the european union and other competitors to step in and take our market share, that's diminished our leadership in asia. the korean trade agreement is key to our engagement in asia and it will be a critical counter to chinese influence in the reful we've heard a lot about chi ma today but how do we counter chinese influence in the region through this adepreem. -- through this agreement. this agreement is critically important because it deepens

our ties with a strong and important ally. the united states and south korea have had a 60-year history of standing together and this agreement is really a step forward in our bilateral relationship and is an important step that we need to take today. i would urge passage of this agreement. it is -- it has been endorsed and i have a four-page list of organizations, associations, enincluding the american farm bue re, the business round table, heritage, other groups, four-page list, many organizations supporting the passage of this agreement and ask unanimous consent to submit that in the record and urge passage of this agreement and yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, and the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. all time for debate has expired. pursuant to house resolution 425, the previous question is ordered on the bill. the question is on engrossment

and third reading of the bill. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. the ayes have it. third reading. the clerk: a bill to implement the united states-korea free trade agreement. the speaker pro tempore: the question is on passage of the bill. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. the ayes have it. the bill is passed. the gentleman from michigan. mr. levin: i ask for a recorded vote. the speaker pro tempore: does the gentleman ask for the yeas and nays? mr. levin: i do. the speaker pro tempore: the yeas and nays are requested. those in fare of taking the vote by the yeas and nays will rise. a sufficient number having risen, the yeas and nays are ordered. further proceedings on this question will be postponed. the gentleman from michigan. mr. camp: i ask further proceedings -- i asked that speaker can postpone as though under clause 8a of rule 20.

the speaker pro tempore: without objection. pursuant to clause 1c of rule 19, further consideration of the motion to concur in the sthath amendment to h.r. 2832 will now resume. the clerk will report the title. the clerk: h.r. 2832, an act to, tend the generalized system of preferences and for other purposes. senate amendment. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from michigan rise? mr. camp: -- at this time, madam speaker, i yield two minutes to a distinguished member of the ways and means committee, the gentlewoman from kansas. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman is recognized for two minutes. ms. jenkins: thank you, madam speaker. three and a half trade deals we have taken up today have

bipartisan support. the three pending free trade agreements and the g.s.p. extension within this bill. both parties and both chambers agree that these important trade packs will grow our economy, create jobs and make america more competitive in the global marketplace. sadly, however, the bipartisan, bicameral approval of the merits of these trade deals did not keep the washington gamesmanship at bay. for nearly 10 months, as they pushed for an extended and enlarged expanded t.a.a. program, our colleagues in the senate allowed the g.f.p. to lapse, holding american jobs hostage until their political allies could be pacified with a sufficient payoff. this delay wasn't simply an intellectual exercise, either. it hurt real businesses, real families an cost us real jobs in my home state of kansas.

take the burger company in atchison, kansas. a family owned company that manufacturers leather goods for sale across the united states. due to increased cost of materials caused by the lapse in g.s.p., they have lost customers to foreign competitors like china, causing lower profits and placing real kansas jobs at risk. i'm voting for this bill because we need g.s.p. to be re-authorized immediately. but i'm extremely disappointed that senate democrats have again risked the continued lapse of this important program all for a t.a.a. program that does not work. the results of washington brinksmanship have a real, live impact across this country so while i'm hopeful we will finally extend the g.s.p. package today, i'm disappointed that washington's political games made our small businesses, like theburger company, wait so long. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from washington.

mr. mcdermott: madam speaker, i yield myself such time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. mcdermott: i rise to express my strong support for h.r. 2832 which is extending what had been historically two programs that received strong bipartisan support. beginning in 1962, the t.a.a. bill was originally put in under the kennedy administration and has been ex-tened for all these years. in the general system of preferences has always been there for a long timeful our importers an exporters have been using it as ways of getting things into the united states that have head real differences not only for our people but for people in developing countries. t.a.a. needs assistance. i don't think anybody would argue, it would be hard to find anybody on the floor of the house who wouldn't say that

trade causes displacement of workers. there are jobs that move here and move there and this is a recognition of that and a statement that we care about, what happens to workers, and that we give them some kind of help. it provides them with support and education and training so, that they can obtain new jobs and grow sectors. in my state we used to have, we used to do log exports. logging was a big issue. then it went away. well, you have to retrain people. and community colleges have trained a lot of people in this kind of thing. in 2009 congress made some much-needed reforms in t.a.a. many of which addressed and passed chris similars of the program. these reforms included extending t.a.a. to cover service workers and more manufacturing workers, offering long-term training and increasing training funds and increasing the health care coverage tax credit.

this was probably the most important of the reforms. when people lose their job they have no health care and everything that you have in your life can be wiped out by an illness or an injury. so the idea that you can get cobra, that's a nice idea, but you got to have money to do that. most of the unemployment checks in this country don't make it possible for people to take advantage of the cobra. so when we had this increase in support from the federal government for the workers, we were really looking at the real problems that people face. now, unfortunately last winter leadership let the 2009 reforms lapse. we had a lot of workers just hanging out there. the general assistance of preferences was also permitted to expire which harmed businesses that rely on the program, both in developing countries and in the united states.

while it's long overdue, i'm pleased to see we're finally moving the legislation to extend both of these programs. i urge my colleagues to join me in supporting h.r. 2832 and i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves the balance of his time. the gentleman from michigan. mr. camp: thank you, madam speaker. at this time i yield three minutes to the distinguished chairman of the rules committee, the gentleman from california, mr. dreier. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from california is recognized for three minutes. mr. dreier: thank you, madam speaker. i ask unanimous consent to revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. dreier: 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, 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 and could he -- in co-chairing what has been a long standing 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 rules committee and phil crane shared the trade subcommittee and with every chairman and 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 that's before us today, which is trade adjustment assistance. now, i know that there's a lot of concern about it, i frankly am 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. and so while some people have

been saying that those of us who were 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. and that's exactly what the trade assistance package is all about. trade adjustment assistance package is all about. it's a modest package of $300 million and i know that last night mr. camp has just informed me that he outlined the details of it to the house, he worked with the chairman of the senate

finance committee, mr. bachus and others, to get to this to the point where we are. but we are now winding down this debate and i have to say that when you think about the fact that ronald reagan on november 6 of 1979 announced his candidacy for president of the united states and in that speech it was seen as heresy, i mean, it was almost a joke, madam speaker, ronald reagan said that he envisioned an accord of free trade among the americas so we could allow for the free flow of goods and services and capital. and he was laughed at here in the united states and he was laughed at throughout the hemisphere. and we have since that time -- mr. camp: i yield the gentleman an additional minute. mr. dreier: i thank my friend. madam speaker, since that time we have seen tremendous, tremendous changes taken place. it's 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 by members of this, the 87, now i guess 89 new members on our side of the aisle who have brought about the change and the makeup of this institution and people who have stepped to the forefront, tom reed, rick bird, tim griffin, bob dold, mr. canseco and many others who have felt strongly about the need to get our economy growing and know that in so doing we will be able to create jobs for u.s. workers. change over the last five years since these agreements were put into place, signed, have been absolutely incredible. can i ask my friend for just an additional -- mr. camp: additional 30 seconds. mr. dreier: yeah, additional 30 seconds. let me close by saying that over that five-year period of time,

madam speaker, we have seen so many tremendous changes that have taken place. five years is half the life for someone who was born, a child who was born on september 11. and the changes in our economy, the global economy, dealing with issues that weren't even addressed and the ipad didn't exist five years ago, when these were put into place. issues like encryption, crossborder data flow, things like intermediary liability, privacy, those were barely discussed then. today those are critical, important issues. this is a very small first step towards regaining our position as the world's global leader and i thank my friend for his support and thank all of our colleagues who have been involved in this. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. the gentleman from washington. mr. mcdermott: madam speaker, i yield 3 1/2 minutes to the gentleman from oregon, mr. blumenauer. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from oregon is recognized for 2 1/2 minutes. without objection. 2 1/2 minutes.

the gentleman is recognized for 2 1/2 minutes. oh, 3 1/2 minutes. mr. mcdermott: 3 1/2 minutes. the speaker pro tempore: excuse me. mr. blumenauer: moving it along here. thank you, madam speaker. i rise in support of h.r. 2832, the trade adjustment assistance extension act of 2011. this legislation continues vital coverage of the t.a.a. program while it expands the general system of preferences, a key trade and development program. we have a responsibility to assure that our workers, communities and economy can adjust to a rapidly globalizing economy. as congress advances international trade opportunities for our firms, it has an opportunity to assure that american workers can also compete. since 1962 the t.a.a. has expanded to respond to the continual changes to the economy and the global system. among the most significant changes were those that we made when the democrats were in charge, just in 2009. which expanded the program to

include service workers as well as improved the coverage of re-employment benefits, job search benefits, relocation and health care benefits. it produced tangible results. the coverage in 2008 certified 125,000 workers. as a result of the changes we made in 2009, 280,000 workers were certified. the expansion of the program appropriately reflects the challenges trade poses to our service economy and continues our commitment to the manufacturing sector. in my state alone, 2010, the coverage reached over 10,000 workers and directed $30 million in federal funds to carry out those efforts, support our economy as it adjusted to competition from international trade. it's interesting to see the broad range of supporters, the communication workers of america say that t.a.a. is a critical

lifeline in providing retraining and education, helping service workers to pull themselves back up and find good, new jobs. while the u.s. chamber of commerce will score the vote on t.a.a., writing that this legislation is a thoughtful compromise that preserves the more effective elements of the five-decade-old t.a.a. program. i'm also pleased that we are dealing with the generalized system of preference. i think my good friend from the state of kansas may have been confused. i was frankly frustrated that it had been held up. we passed it in the last congress. there was nothing to have prevented my republican friends from bringing it forward at the beginning of this congress. in fact, i wish that they would. but they didn't get around to it until september. i don't know why, but i think the criticism is misplaced. but regardless each day without action on g.s.p. costs american companies $1,800,000 in extra,

unnecessary import tariffs. i watched as the expiration of g.s.e. cut containers in oregon, $50,000 already this year. $10,000 for this company, $70,000 over here, another $5,000, it adds up. $1.8 million a day. but it's more than just a trade agreement and helping american companies. under the g.s.p. program, we judge our trading partners on the protection of american commercial interests, such as the protection of intellectual property, the preventing the seizure of property belonging to u.s. citizens or businesses, we judge them on the protection of individual rights, the protection of commonly accepted labor rights, and the elimination of child labor. mr. mcdermott: i yield the gentleman an additional minute. mr. blumenauer: we ought to add the protection of the

environment to this criteria. i raised it in our ways and means hearing and it was distribute thought was we were going to go ahead and not adjust the status quo. but the protection of environmental -- the environment exerts tremendous influence on international trade. the trade of illegal he will logged timber caused u.s.-based legal timber industry billions of dollars a year. if we truly expect trade to be a tool of development, trade must support environmental protections in our partner nations. as our free trade agreements do. concern for the environment is a core element of development, it reflects appreciation for civil law, for the protection of the rights of individuals and of a concern for the long-term sustainability of state and society and of the planet. it should have a place in our g.s.p. program. i hope when it comes next before us that we've added environmental protections to the criteria.

thank you and i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. the gentleman from michigan. mr. camp: thank you. at this time i yield two minutes to the distinguished gentleman from pennsylvania, mr. kelly. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from pennsylvania is recognized for two minutes. mr. kelly: i rise in strong support of the bill. i can speak very clearly about the relationship that we have with korea because in addition to being a general motors dealer who sells cadillacs, i also sell hyundai and i canas. i can tell you that the alliance that we have had, the very strong partner we have had in korea since 1949, they have fought with us in every military skermish, side by side, shoulder to shoulder, with us. in the united states alone hyundai has invested over $3 billion in bricks and mortar and building two plants, one in alabama, the other in georgia. and when we're worried about the number of cars being sold here, let's understand one thing. that over 60% of the korean cars sold in the united states are sold in the united states are made by