being given in here, i think he said it differently, but it ourned out those things weren't true -- it turned out those things weren't true. abortion is paid for with federal dollars. the federal government even -- the federal government even has fought people in court like these precious catholic nuns, little sisters of mercy, they've dedicated their lives to helping our nation's poor and people that are downready toen. gosh, those -- downtrodden. gosh, those are the kind of people who used to, government officials revered admired respected. not now. because those broken promises even resulted in this administration fighting them in court to try to force them to have insurance that paid for abortion, that these precious nuns believed was murdering a child in the womb. . so constituents were against

tar, there were people who supported the free trade agreement, just as you and i supported free trade. they supported this t.p.a., this -- that truly will give the president more authority, and i remember some of these same people saying, look, we don't have to worry because by passing the bill we're about to pass, the president can't remove anybody from guantanamo without giving us notice and when he gives us notice, we can stop him. i mean, i've been told that. and in fact the law is he can't remove anybody from guantanamo without first giving us notice. the american people remember that. and they also happen to have noticed that the president cut a deal for a guy that looks like it's going to be charged with desertion and released five

terrorists from guantanamo and didn't give us notice until after he released them. so i love the optimism that says, yes, there have been misrepresentations from this administration over and over and over and over, and now we've had six and a half years of continued misrepresentations from an administration and the good news is, this time, we really think he means it. now i love that kind of optimism. i really do. but i want to yield to my friend for his thoughts. >> you are an optimist, mr. gohmert. mr. massie: but you are also a realist. we all need to be realists. and the best way to keep promises is not to make a promise you can't keep or not make a promise you can't make

somebody else keep. so for we've shown we're pretty ineffectule here in congress keeping the president maintaining those promises. if you like the plan you have you can keep it is one of those promises i remember. while we're talking about the affordable care act, i remember congress was told pass it so you can see what's in it. we're told pass the t.p.a. so you can see what's in the t.p.p., at least so our constituents can see it. i want to conclude with this -- mr. gohmert: before my friend get taos far, i want to point out, he and i have been down to the classified area and viewed the t.p.p. but as i understand it, the president is going to be allowed to add like 20% to that that we have not even had an opportunity to see system of even when we say we been down to the classified area, they made it available we've been through it. we can't say that all of it was

provided. if -- is that your understanding? mr. massie: that's absolutely correct. furthermore, the document we viewed was a draft it is not complete. if you read it virtually every page of it has a footnote that says, we're still working on this page. so yeah, we are fast tracking something that we can't see, we're not really going to be party to the negotiations, and we can't control the outcome of it. so i think we should do that with great caution. i just want to close with this. i want to say that the vote today was not a referendum on free trade. it was not a referendum on whether it benefit ours country to trade with other countries. we know that we believe it, we have seen it. trade is good. but this was a referendum on giving the president more authority. this was a referendum on voting for something we can't see, we can't verify, and this was a referendum on a huge, giant document, reminds me of some of

the omnibus bills we're given two days to read that come to this body, 1600 pages. but this was a referendum on the process. that's why they couldn't get the bill passed today. t.p.a. is not a law yet. didn't pass today but we support free trade. i know my colleague does. we just don't support the t.p.a. with that, i will yield back. thank you. mr. gohmert: if my friend would yield for a question, i'd like to -- my friend has observed all the goings on very closely. the president has acted extraordinarily in reaching out to congress, trying to push through this aid bill. i'm curious whether my friend thinks maybe this for the first time is an effort by the president reaching out to make

the republican party, republican leadership look good or does -- what kind of motivation do you think most likely caused him to reach out more than he has as i recall on a bill? mr. massie: i don't want to question anybody's motivations here in this body or in the other branch of the government but i will say i have seen a zeal for the deal. a zeal for the trade deal. a zeal far deal that people don't fully even understand but they just want to get the deal done. and so i think they just need to slow down, look at the terms of the keel, deal get some experts in that room with you, when we're looking at that secret document. have them tell you what all those things mean in there. just kind of calm down the zeal for the deal and we can do trade, we can do free trade, we can do trade agreements. but not this giant omnibus like trade agreement. thank you. mr. gohmert: i appreciate my friend. my problem is, having had so many provisions explained, for

example, oh, this won't affect senior biscuiting $700 billion out of medicare and gee, if you're just re-- if you'll just renew the patriot act, section 215, gosh, you've got to be a terrorist before we get any of your personal information, your data. there have just been so many explanations and promises that have been made and with regard to section 215 of the patriot act, that was over two administrations. but there have been so many representations on what an administration particularly this administration, believes something means that allowed activity far beyond that, that even if this administration the prior administration says this is what something means i'm sorry, the judge completely

hasn't left me, the chief justice completely hasn't left me. and so i care more about what the language says on its face than what somebody tells me they think it will mean or how they will apply it. again, you know, we were told things about obamacare and the way it would be interpreted and carried out the patriot act, the way it would be interpreted and carried out. it turns out simply was not the case. it's still why i'm concerned over the part of section 215 even though i've been assured oh no, it really doesn't mean anything, but it's just not only -- it says not only can they gather they are data of people associated with terrorists or involved in international terrorism, but it has this lit twol-letter disjunctive that or clandestine intelligence activities. nobody will explain where that

is defined in writing because until it's defined adequately in writing, that could mean anything anyone wants it to mean. it's just too vague. allows too much arbitraryness and capriciousness. so i'm not as concerned about what people tell me something says or means because i know when you put words in a bill, at some point, some judge somewhere, is going to say, you know what? those words actually say, they mean exactly what they say. so i'm concerned about the power that's given to the president, i'm concerned about the ability of the president to cut deals and if he happens to forget to give us notice as he happened to do with regard to the five terrorists that were released from guantanamo, then i don't see this body stepping up and

stopping him. i know we absolutely pledged we were going to on the illegal, unconstitutional amnesty he did but then we decided, well we'll just trust a judge in texas that his ruling will be upheld all the way to -- to the supreme court so we gave up on that fight as a body. but i just have not seen anything from the house and senate, when it was under total democratic control and now that indicates we are going to be able to step up and stop the president if there's a violation of the law or violation of personal commitments that were made. and because of that, i was not comfortable voting for t.p.a. i could not vote for it. i voted against t.a.a. because it would facilitate t.p.a., and

i do have to make a paraphernalia at the call note here, it's interesting we're assured that t.p.a. is going to create this massive number of jobs but we have to, absolutely have to pass t.a.a., which creates additional welfare because there are going to be so many americans that lose their jobs as a result of t.p.a. so it's going to create all these americans jobs but we have to have t.a.a. to cover all the american jobs that are lost that go overseas when the fact is, you want a free trade agreement you want to blow the doors off the barriers in the world to american goods and services, let's cut the biggest tariff that any nation in the world puts on its own goods and services called a corporate tax. let's cut it. get -- if not eliminate, get it

below that of china. and the cuts@prices will be so a-- cuts to the prices will be so astounding that the doors will come down, they'll have to come down, because our goods will not only be the best in the world but they'll be the best prices in the world. so we want real free trade. you're not going to get it by cutting a deal with countries that manipulate their currencies. those were excellent points that some across the aisle made. talking about free trade with countries that manipulate their own currency, you're not going to get free trade with countries that manipulate their own currencies because they can always maneuver around you and make their product better. so this didn't address the manipulative nature of some nations' currencies. without that, you're not going to have a free trade deal.

so i would like to be an optimist and say that this bill that president obama pushed so hard historically hard for his administration to get passed, i would like to be the optimist that so many of my colleagues are and say, the reason president obama was pushing for this so hard is this will really curtail his ability to make agreements without our agreement. i'd like to think he worked that hard to curtail his own power. but the realist, the old judge in me, comes back and has to say the verdict is, he pushed for this t.p.a. because it was going to give him a lot more power than he has now. with that, should i yield to my friend from florida? i'd be happy to do so. how much time ve maining? -- time is remaining?

the speaker pro tempore: 30 seconds remaining. mr. gohmert: i yield those 30 seconds to the gentleman from florida. >> i appreciate the gentleman from texas. i look forward to working with you in the future to talk about future negotiation and make sure that the federal government every time we act, every time we move, every time we move is to do what's best for america to make america strongering manager competitive and a better nation to pass on to our next generation with that, i yield back and thank you. mr. gohmert: i thank my friend and yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. for what purpose does the gentleman from texas seek recognition? mr. gohmert: i move that we do now hereby adjourn. the speaker pro tempore: the question is on the motion to adjourn. those in favor say aye those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. accordingly the house stands adjourned until noon on monday next for morning hour debate.

the house is here back monday at noon, 2:00 p.m. for legislative work and live coverage here on c-span. it's the house day that began with the president coming up to capitol hill a rare visit for the president meeting with the democratic caucus this morning at 9:350er7b. the house broke, they took a recess for that meeting so the president could try to convince those democratic members to vote for the trade packages. the trade adjustment assistance package and that goes down to a strong defeat, 126-302. it needed 218 to pass. that was the measure that would provide economic assistance to those affected by trade deals. the next measure the fast track or trade promotion authority, passes 219-211.

and then the final vote, and just before the final vote, speaker boehner made a rare motion to reconsider the t.a.a. vote. so it is likely, very likely the house will vote on that again next week. the last vote on customs enforcement deals also with currency manipulation and that passed 240-196 votes. some tweets about that from reporters. scott young of "the hill" talking about steve scalise saying the democrats, quote, took a hostage they realize they can't afford to shoot." ryan grim saying everything hinges on progressive democrats hanging tough on t.a.a. next week. and chad, paul ryan on trade, this isn't over yet. a few minutes ago from the majority leader, kevin mccarthy another republican leaders up on capitol hill.

-- leader up on capitol hill. mr. mccarthy: i am disappointed that t.a.a. did not pass. we are not done with this. we have the opportunity to bring this back. i'm very proud for the bipartisanship that took t.p.a. across. this is very important to the entire world. but we have not had this authority. there has been 100 agreements, and america has been a part of zero. if we want to be able to improve this economy and expand our ability for jobs in america and trade, we need to finish this job. mr. scalise: the house came together and says that trade is critical for our country to be able to sell our prodetectives all across the world and for american workers to be able at

a level playingfield. if our workers will be on a level playing field we will -- they came together and said that american trade is important but also we sent the message to other allies in asia and europe who want to knock down barriers who are tired of china writing the rules of the game, they want america to have a leadership goal. so the president has got to work with his party to come up with the votes to pass t.a.a. but you saw a strong showing today of republicans combined with free trade democrats to recognize how important it is in global leadership for america to lead on trade. mr. ryan: i'm very proud of this congress today. i'm very proud of the house republican caucus. i'm also very proud and thankful for the pro-trade democrats that kept their word and stuck with us in this process. america is being watched by the

rest of the world as to whether or not america is going to lead in the world. and i think this sent the right signal. now the president has some work yet to do with his party to complete this process. this isn't over yet. and we hope that they can get together and make sure that we finish this so that america is back leading. our constituents are expecting us to make a difference. the people of this country need a faster economy. they need more opportunity. we need to open markets. we need to write the rules of the global economy instead of having others to do so. this is what's at stake. that's why i'm so proud of our caucus today, of the pro-trade democrats today and that i am hopeful that the democrats understand the consequences and get together with the president and finish this as soon as possible. >> ways and means committee chairman paul ryan and other republican leaders just a short

while ago on capitol hill following the votes this afternoon on trade. again, the trade adjustment assistance package going down to a large defeat. 126-302. but it will be brought back next week for reconsideration. speaker john boehner making that motion this afternoon. the house is done for the week. they are back monday at noon for legislative work and 2:00 p.m. for -- monday at noon for speeches and 2:00 p.m. for legislative work. we will show some of the debate starting with the chair of the ways and means committee, paul ryan of wisconsin. ime as he wishes to use. mr. ryan: mr. speaker the question before us today, it's really pretty simple. is america going to shape the global economy? or is it going to shape us? 95% of the world's consumers, they don't live in this country they live in other countries. so if we want to create more

jobs in america, we've got to make more things here in america and sell them over there. in fact, one out of every five jobs in america already today depends on trade. and you know what? that's a good thing. because these jobs pay more. they pay on average 18% more. but while the world is moving full steam ahead, we have been standing still, mr. speaker, we haven't completed a trade agreement in years. today there are 262 free trade agreements in place across the world. we are party to 14. since 2007 when the last version of trade promotion authority expired, there have been 100 trade agreements negotiated and signed.

the u.s. is a party to none of those. china is negotiating seven agreements right now including one with 16 countries. in the global economy, if you are standing still, you are falling behind. because all these other countries are negotiating agreements without us. what that basically means is, other countries are lowering their trade barriers between those countries and as a result of them lowering their trade barriers making their products more affordable, getting more market share, they are putting up barriers against our products. making it harder for us to get access to those markets. look, big companies can set up a factory in another country, make something there, and sell it there. getting trade agreements means we move those barriers so we keep those factories here, so all businesses, big and small, can make things in america, grow things in america, and sell them overseas.

let me just give you an example. since the year 2000, there have been 48 trade agreements in east asia alone. america has been a party to overwhelm two of them. and as a result of that -- only two of them. as a result of that our share of imports fell by 42%. the rules of the global economy they are being written right now, mr. speaker. that's not the question. the question is, are we going to write the rules of the global economy with our allies? or are we going to let other countries write the rules such as china? this is why h.r. 1314, the trade act, would establish t.p.a., or trade promotion authority. now, there's been a lot of confusion about this bill. a lot of honest confusion and sometimes a lot of intentional confusion. let me say really clearly what this bill is. t.p.a. is not a trade deal.

t.p.a. is not a trade agreement. t.p.a. is a process for negotiating a trade agreement. congress is not considering a trade agreement today. there is no secret agreement that nobody has read that's being voted on today. all we are voting on today is a process by which congress considers trade agreements. the earliest we would do so would be in the fall at the earliest. why should we care about this process? because a good process gets us a good result. this t.p.a. will give us the leverage that we in congress need to get a fair deal for the american worker. because when other countries know that the deal that they agreed to is the deal congress will vote on, they will give us their best offers. countries aren't going to give us a good agreement if they have to negotiate with 536 people. here's how it works. congress says to the president, when you submit a trade

agreement, we will give you an up or down vote on three conditions. first, you have got to pursue specific negotiating objectives. 150 of them. here's what we want to see in a trade agreement and here's what cannot be in a trade agreement. second you've got to keep us informed. you have to regularly consult with congress. congress must have access to all the negotiating text. right now, it's whatever the administration chooses to give us. they control it. they decide on their terms with t.p.a., congress says, no, no, no. we in congress get access to these negotiating documents while it's being negotiated. we in congress are accredited to go to the negotiation it is we want to. and with the zinke prote -- protocol, if we can't make it we'll send representatives to these negotiations. third, and perhaps most

importantly, transparency. the old days they used to call this thing fast track. the president goes out and gets an agreement and then, wham, whizzes it through, have congress vote on it, it's in law. everybody is wondering what just happened? what's in this thing? not again. no more. when an agreement is reached, when america gets an agreement with other countries, before the president can even sign off on it, we make it publicly -- public for 60 days, up on the internet, everybody can read it for themselves and see what it is. that's in this law. never done that before. and then the president can sign it. but when he signs it, it doesn't go into effect. when he signs it it just means he sends it to congress. and then congress considers it. congress considers it and congress determines whether it's going to happen or not. it's a bill like any other bill. congress has to pass it. they have to affirmatively pass it for it to go into effect.

if the house of representatives doesn't like the trade agreement, and they vote it down with a simple majority vote, it doesn't happen. that's what this bill does. we have the final say. now, i understand a lot of our members, certainly on our side of the aisle they don't trust this administration. join the club. neither do i. that is precisely why i support this bill. t.p.a. puts congress in the driver's seat. mr. speaker, the world is watching this. the world is watching whether or not, and they are trying to make a decision, is america still america? or is america in retreat? our allies want our leadership. our adversaries are measuring how much we stack up. our enemies would love for us to retreat. the world is watching as to whether or not america is going to lead in the world whether

america in the dawn of the 21st century is going to take command of writing the rules of the global economy or cede that command to other countries. if we establish t.p.a., we are saying on a bipartisan basis we want america to lead. we believe in our country. we believe in our workers. we believe in our economy. we want to open up markets so that we can use american ingenuity and american work to create american jobs. so we can sell our goods and our services our products overseas. so we can create more good paying jobs here at home. that's what this is about. it's about getting us on the playing field. is00 trade agreements negotiated, signed -- 100 trade agreements negotiated, signed, since 2007. we are a party to zero of those. the rest of the world is moving around. the rest of the world is getting better deals.

the rest of the world is freezing us out. we have to get back in this game and lead this game and define this game. with that, mr. speaker, i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from wisconsin reserves his time. the chair recognizes the gentleman from michigan. mr. levin: i allocate as much time as i use to myself. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for as much time as he wishes to use. mr. levin: i have worked in all my years here to expand trade in ways that spread its benefits to the many not just to the few. charlie rangel and i led the fight to include strong and enforcible labor and environmental provisions and to strike the right balance between innovation and access to medicines in the historic may 10 agreement of 2007. the trouble with this t.p.a. is that it means no meaningful provisions whatsoever in t.p.p. on currency manipulation, which

has destroyed millions of middle class american jobs and allows investors to challenge american health and environmental regulations and others not through the american legal system but through unregulated, arbitration panels. it's about a t.p.p. going in the wrong direction on access to medicines and in some important ways environmental protections. and it's about countries like mexico that deny their workers basic labor rights to gain and uncompetitive advantage over our companies and workers. and vietnam and ma lashesea who stand in clear violation of the may 10 provisions on international worker rights with no plan we know of. in that sense it's secret of a

t.p.p. to change that. far from a progressive trade agreement. . on this and every other area in t.p.p. they are left to be determined whether they were met by those who did the negotiating, and i just want to say these negotiating objectives are so vague they are meaningless and to hold them up is something that holds ustr to action is simply a mirage. instead of passing this bill, which gives a blank check to the administration to finish up t.p.p. negotiations where they are now and leaves congress with only an up or down vote at the end, we should be using our leverage to impact the negotiations. this bill does not do that.

we in congress, despite all the rhetoric, all the rhetoric, we in congress will be in the backseat not in the falsely claimed driver seat. this is what this is all about not protectionism versus free trade, not reflective opposition as sometimes claimed to expand a trade. i've worked for expanded trade. quite the opposite. i want a t.p.p. that is worthy of broad bipartisan support. as to t.a.a., proponents of t.p.a. they're the ones who linked the two together in a single bill. t.a.a. should not be a bargaining chip to get a deeply flawed t.p.a. across the finished line and that's how this has been set up. this t.p.a. should stand on its

own feet. even in its best form t.a.a. was a modest program and i was one of the authors supporting it. but this t.a.a. bill includes a number of shortcomings compared to the high water mark of the program. despite the fact that the need in this country is growing and trade is expanding. the truth of the matter is we need to do far more to train and educate our workers and to invest in our future in order to compete in a global economy. a no vote will give us an opportunity another opportunity to improve t.a.a. and t.p.a. and to achieve our ultimate goal that i and others have been working for months and months and months and months, and that's the goal, a strong t.p.p. agreement that

can gain broad bipartisan support. i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves the balance of his time. the chair recognizes the gentleman from wisconsin. the gentleman from wisconsin is recognized. mr. ryan: are we not ready to recess? mr. ryan: mr. speaker, let me inquire as to the time allotment between the two at this time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from wisconsin has 21 1/2 minutes. mr. ryan: 21 1/2?

the gentleman from michigan? the speaker pro tempore: 25 for the gentleman from michigan. mr. ryan: would the gentleman from michigan want to equalize and yield some time to one of his speakers? mr. levin: ok. i yield two minutes to the gentleman from texas, mr. doggett. mr. doggett: thank you. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from texas is recognized for two minutes. mr. doggett: mr. speaker some have called trade adjustment assistance burial insurance since it delivers limited help after a job is dead and buried. at a time when fast trackers are claiming that they will include over half of the world economy, we need a t.a.a. that is funded for more workers at risk of job loss. unfortunately this particular t.a.a. proposal is really short for taking away assistance. it includes substantially less funding than the administration has said was essential to

protect those who lose their jobs through expanded trade. further, this t.a.a. fails to restore coverage to thousands whose jobs may be exported. in a very contrived process this morning designed to obscure what's really happening and to remove accountability from members of this house, desperate fast trackers and fast talkers have split up the senate bill into two pieces, two votes before they put it back together in exactly the same form it was when it first got to the house and along the way they have some self-executing rule so that it appears that members are not voting to do what they're doing. the first vote we take today is -- at the end of this debate is on t.a.a. vote no. your vote no offers an opportunity to achieve both better trade adjustment

assistance and better trade legislation. and your vote no will also assure you are not on record as voting to send a bill which was exactly what will happen if you vote yes, to send a bill to the president that cuts medicare by $700 million. reject this bill and develop a better alternative that reflects our values and 21st century economic realities. what really needs adjusting here today is the no compromise, no amendment attitude on trade. this vote wouldn't be so close if this process hasn't been so closed. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. the gentleman from michigan reserves his time, and the gentleman from wisconsin is recognized. mr. ryan: i'd like to yield two minutes to the former of the chairman -- former chairman 69 trade subcommittee, the gentleman from california, mr. nunes. the speaker pro tempore: for how much time? mr. ryan: two minutes. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for two

minutes. mr. nunes: thank you, mr. speaker. this is a time where everyone needs to step back in this body and really relies what we're here to do today. this is a historic moment. we will either move forward with our allies, with our partners, with our trading partners or we will move back. t.p.a. is just one step, it's a step that we must have in order to pass additional trade agreements that we've been doing throughout our history. if you look at where we're at today, this is about trade promotion authority. people will have plenty of time to look at whatever trade agreements come down the pipe over the next five years. that's what this debate's about. and why do we need trade agreements? because we need to reduce tariffs on products that are made in the united states so that we have a better opportunity to export them overseas. but mr. speaker, this agreement has geopolitical concerns also.

and what that's really about, if you look down the road at the first trade agreement that was supposed to come up, it's supposed to be the trans-pacific partnership. today if you look at what our partners and allies in asia are dealing with, they're dealing with a behemoth in china and china doesn't want to play by the rules. they consistently have avoided playing by the rules, which is putting our allies at risk and our trading partners at risk which is why we need to come together and pass an agreement that puts -- if you pass the trans-pacific partnership and the e.u. agreement, you will have them under one set of rules and that's what this is really about. we move to the trans-pacific partnership. we move to the european agreement. we get 2/3 of the world's economy under the same set of rules. so i hope that my colleagues will step back and just, you

know, stop all the rhetoric on both sides of the aisle, on one side we have people who are clearly representing the labor unions. on the other side we have people who don't want to give the president a victory. but today, mr. speaker, is a time where we need to step back and do the right thing for the right reasons for the american people. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. the gentleman from wisconsin reserves. the gentleman from michigan is recognized. mr. levin: mr. speaker, may i just ask unanimous consent that mr. tiberi be permitted to control time on our side? the speaker pro tempore: without objection, so ordered. and the gentleman from michigan is recognized. mr. levin: i yield two minutes to a member of our committee, mr. kind of wisconsin. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for two minutes. mr. kind: i thank my friend for yielding. thank you, mr. speaker. i rise in support of legislation trade promotion authority as well as trade adjustment assistance. what we are debating and what we have to decide upon today is whether to grant this president, this administration the same type of trade negotiating authority that every president since f.d.r.,

minus richard nixon, has enjoyed. as a democrat who has supported this administration, i wonder why we would not at least have a modicum of trust for this president to try and go get the best deal he can. we will have an opportunity later to analyze any agreement that's reached to make sure it makes sense for our constituents, for our states and ultimately for our country. but let's be clear here. we are already trading with these nations vietnam malaysia. the question moving forward now is what the rules of trade are going to be and that's why we need to be at the table negotiating those rules elevating standards and now we're going to be negotiating core labor, environmental and human rights standards in the body of the agreement, fully enforceable like any other provision in it. and it's something we lacked in past trade agreements. when president obama first ran for election he was hoping for an opportunity to go back and amend nafta because he felt, as

i do, there were deficiencies in that agreement. this is the opportunity to go back and amend the problems that nafta created. the lack of core labor or environmental standards, especially as it related with mexico. so we need to be clear that this is an opportunity to move forward, getting the rules of trade and the standards elevated up to where we are so we have a level playing field for our workers, our farmers, our businesses to compete. otherwise, the alternative is a race to the bottom with no rules at all or possibly with china's rules, and that ultimately are the choices we face here today -- to move forward with this authority, to move forward with these trade agreements, elevating standards to where we are or end up in a global trading system with no rules or china's rules. that would be a race to the bottom and we will not be able to compete very effectively in it. i encourage my colleagues to support the legislation today

so we can level the playing field for those at home. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from michigan reserves his time. the chair recognizes the gentleman from ohio. mr. tiberi: thank you. it's my honor to ack knowledge and -- acknowledge and speak on this issue, a member of the ways and means committee and a great partner in trying to open up and break down barriers around the world mr. young from indiana. the speaker pro tempore: how much time? mr. tiberi: i yield him one minute. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for one minute. mr. young: i rise in support of h.r. 1314, the trade act of 2015, and h.r. 644, the trade facilitation and trade enforcement act. with 96% of the world's customers living outside of the united states remains vital for congress to facilitate free trade agreements through the passage of trade promotion authority. absent t.p.a., america will continue to sit on the sidelines while the rest of the world negotiates free trade agreements and opens additional markets. in my home state of indiana, we

have the largest per capita manufacturers in the united states. in the hoosier state, exporting manufacturing goods supports 22% of our manufacturing jobs. one out of every five. our hoosier farmers export over $3.6 billion across our five largest agricultural export sectors. at the end of the day, trade equals jobs. congress must pass t.p.a. to empower our negotiators to receive the best deal possible for american families and job creators. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. mr. young: request an additional 30 seconds. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for 30 seconds. mr. young: i want to further say i was proud to work with chairman ryan to ensure the house was able to include language within this act to ensure that no future free trade agreement can include language for back door, cap and trade agreements. we included language that would prevent this.

it would negatively impact states like indiana which is the second largest user of coal in the united states. i look forward to voting in support of this vital legislation, and i yield back my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back his time. the gentleman from ohio reserves his time. the chair recognizes the gentleman from michigan. mr. levin: mr. speaker i think there's been agreement between the two parties that we could recess. the speaker pro tempore: pursuant to clause 1-c, further considerations on the motions leader e entleman from cifa, mrccntock. mr.cclintock: ihahe gentlemanor ydind his work. adeas posty. in ytrad th sides go away th grralue r themselvr t tde wouldt kelace. more rks means mo js and higher was for arican woer or proctsntg our

more consumer choices and lower prices. trade agreements make trade possible, but the authority to effectively negotiate trade agreements lapsed years ago handicapping america ever since. this is not some new power. it just restores the same negotiating process that has served us well since the 1930's. a lot of people confuse the t.a.a. with t.p.p., the agreement that's not been finalized. this bill assures it has to meet 150 connolly mandated conditions and be available for every american to read for at least 60 days before congress votes to approve or reject it. t.p.a. tells world markets america is back. the eaker pro mpore:he gentlan from mhigan. m levini yield a minutend half a m of r

mmi membefrom geo . les. the speaker prtempore: the geneman from geoia is recogniz. mr. s: i thk mfrien a my rkinember fo yielng. sp i rise in strong positionothe tck endmen or 20 years a stood on thery houselo in sitio nta. i felt stro then as that these agreements are about more than trade. they are a reflection of our values. let me be clear i am for trade since nafta i have opposed some agreement and supported others. but i'm not for trade at any cost. those on the ways and means committee tried time and time again to make this legislation better. but mine and every single democrat amendment was rejected. mr. speaker, i visited vietnam

and i know there's much work to be done. there's no freedom to organize, freedom of speech is limited. the people of georgia are calling and writing my office in waves. for over 20 years textile and automobile factories disappeared from metro atlanta. jobs were shipped to bangladesh to china to mexico. america should not have to compete with starvation wages and environmental destruction. mr. speaker, i do not know about you, but as joshua of old said as for me and my house i'm going to cast my lot with the working people of america. today we have an opportunity to do what is right and what is just. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for 15 seconds. mr. lewis: trade policy should reflect our values, human rights and trade has always been connected. this is not new.

this planet is not ours to waste. not to use what we need and leave this planet a little greener and a little more peaceful for generations. this should be a headlight and not a taillight. i urge each and every member of this congress to do what is right, stand up for the working people of our country and i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from ohio. mr. tiberi: thank you. i yield one minute to a leader on trade, ways and means subcommittee, the gentleman from minnesota, mr. paulsen for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from minnesota is recognized for one minute. mr. paulsen: thank you mr. speaker, members. you know, it is difficult to overstate the importance of trade with other countries. you know, the benefits of trade are huge and enormous for our economy. if you take the trade we have, you add them, we have a trade surplus. if you take the trade agreements -- the nontrade

agreements with the countries we don't have trade agreements with we have a deficit. efit us. there's no doubt that u.s. has been on the sidelines in recent years. this gets us back in the game, making us create a healthier economy here at home, changing and making sure that our status as a global leader will be right back on top, higher paying jobs, better paying jobs and this is an opportunity also, to make sure that united states is setting the rules for our economy for the world economy instead of china. mr. speaker, if you're for these things, you should be for this legislation. trade promotion authority allows these agreements to move forward with congressional oversight, and i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from michigan. mr. levin: i now yield a minute and a half to the gentleman from illinois, a member of our committee, mr. davis. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from illinois is recognized for 1 1/2 minutes. mr. davis: thank you mr. speaker. and i rise in strong opposition to the trade bill before us. i'm also in opposition to using one cent of medicare money for

anything other than paying for health care for senior citizens. i'm not anti-trade. i believe in trade, and i want a trade bill, but i want a trade bill that creates jobs and economic opportunity for the communities that i represent. i want a trade bill that creates fair wages and opportunities for employment. i don't want a bill that continues to help the rich get richer and the poor get poorer and the middle class gets squeezed into oblivion. and i don't want to fast track. as a matter of fact, the jobs and economic development have left the communities i represent fast enough. they don't need our help, and they don't need to be gone. we need jobs in america. i'm going to vote against this, and if i do and if it's the

wrong vote, i'm going to be voting with the people that i represent, the people who sent me here, the people who have said, represent us. they want a no vote. i vote no because i represent them. and i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from ohio. mr. tiberi: thank you, mr. speaker. i now yield one minute to the gentleman from nebraska, mr. smith, a leader on trade, a member of the ways and means and trade subcommittee. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from nebraska is recognized for one minute. mr. smith: mr. speaker, i rise today in support of the trade act of 2015. we have the opportunity to remove major trade barriers which make it harder to sell u.s. products to consumers in other countries. to grow our economy we must expand our access to 96% of consumers outside the united states. nebraska's producers, farmers, ranchers and others want to serve new markets, and this bill is an important step forward. a number of concerns have been

raised, and i want to clarify a couple of points. many nebraskans are concerned about the president's actions on a number of issues. to address these concerns, we need to actually pass this bill and establish more than 150 congressional parameters that the president will be required to follow as trade negotiations take place. some might be concerned that no one is allowed to read proposed trade agreements. we must pass this bill, actually, to ensure that every member of this body has full access to negotiating text and any final agreement is publicly posted online for 60 days before the president can sign it. this bill also ensures we have a up or down vote on any trade agreement and contains new provisions if the executive branch doesn't follow our rules. this bill is an important step for opportunity and growth, and i yield a aye vote. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. the gentleman from michigan. mr. levin: mr. speaker, i now yield two minutes to another valid member of our committee, mr. blumenauer from oregon.

the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from oregon is recognized for two minutes. mr. blumenauer: thank you. democrats just left a very powerful presentation from the president of the united states to our members who simply ask that our members vote their -- play it straight. vote for things they believe in. for instance 125 democrats voted for trade adjustment assistance to help workers displaced because of things in the global economy. we have a provision before us today that is actually stronger than what 125 of us voted for before, and yet there are some that are thinking, well, they may not vote for it. i have ads run against me for cutting medicare and yet i'm going to ask to enter a letter from the american hospital association, american medical association, american home care

and hospice to point out there were no cuts to medicare because of the changes we are involved in making. now, this is part of the problem we're having dealing with how to concern trade promotion authority. this is something that all of us should embrace. it sets the rules for the administration to negotiate and how we'll evaluate it. it will guarantee, as my friend from nebraska just pointed out, everybody in america will have almost five full months to look at it before it's ever voted on. and it contains the strongest environmental and labor provisions of any trade provisions in history. that is what people talk to me about when they wanted nafta fixed. trade promotion authority that we have here will do it. it is very important. i have not stopped working to improve this package. i've got things i want to change, work with the senate,

work in conference committee and if we ever get an agreement, then i will evaluate the t.p.p. based on what's in it, not explanation innuendo and reckless charges. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. without objection, the gentleman's reference to the letter will be entered into the record. the gentleman from ohio. mr. tiberi: thank you, mr. speaker. i yield one minute to the gentleman from illinois, a new member of the ways and means committee, bob dold. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from illinois is recognized for one minute. mr. dold: thank you, mr. speaker. mr. speaker, we want to make sure that we're moving forward and providing american leadership when it comes to trade. my friend from oregon here just ar particularally noted -- ar particularly noted why this needs to move forward. one in three manufacturing jobs relies upon exports. 95% of the world's consumers are outside the united states. i want to make sure we have good high-paying jobs right here at home and to be able to

do that is to make sure we're deciding what are the rules of the road when it comes to trade. the rules of the 21st century and the global economy are being written today, and the question is -- will the united states of america be there to be able to write these rules, to be part of the process? because if we don't, certainly china and others will. putting the united states and our businesses our workers at an enormous disadvantage. we want trade deals that are enforceable, accountable and have high standards. this is about creating good, high-paying american jobs. this is what we all want, and frankly we have an opportunity to move forward. and my minute's up so i'm going to yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. the gentleman from michigan. mr. levin: i now yield to another member of our committee, mr. pascrell of new jersey two minutes. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from new jersey is recognized for two minutes. mr. pascrell: i'll tell you

what an innuendo is. it's saying that the jobs that we lose are going to replace by just as good or better jobs. well here's the record. remember you're given assistance to workers who already lost their jobs. wouldn't it make sense logically to try to save the job in the first place? or do we believe, as bush said -- president bush said 2004, february, in his economic report hey, if they make it cheaper overseas we got to do something else. that's a way out. that's innuendo. if you want to talk about inequality, the jobs we're losing in manufacturing pay over $600 a week. and the jobs that are being replaced $330. who are we kidding here? get to the facts. get to the facts. past trade deals have hurt the

american worker. and by the way you placed this thing, those who are proponents of this legislation that we are against trade. nothing can be further from the truth. we want fair deals that help our workers. that's what this is all about. my town, textile business, lost everything 40, 50 years ago. 25,000 to 30,000 people were employed with that textile industry, and we sat here in the congress of the united states and watched these people lose their jobs and you sure as heck they want the retail jobs. you know what they paid, fast track and the underlike pppp will continue the trend of corporation -- trans-pacific partnership will continue the trend of corporations offshoring american jobs, driving down wages. and now we're going to be competing with the vietnamese who pay nearly 60 cents an hour. everybody can't be like us. we understand that. we're not against trade. we want it to be fair, we want

the american worker to be protected. that's what this is all about. we had our fears confirmed when the president told us that china wanted to join the t.p.p. that's the icing on the cake making a bad deal even worse and i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. the gentleman from ohio. mr. tiberi: thank you, mr. speaker. i'd like to remind my friend that globalization occurred long before any trade agreement. my dad lost his job his steelworker job years before nafta. and in fact we have a trade surplus, mr. speaker with 20 -- i don't have enough time to yield, sir. we have a trade surplus with 20 countries we have a trade agreement with. a deficit with the countries that we don't. it's now my privilege to yield a minute and a half to the gentleman from pennsylvania, a member of the ways and means committee, pat meehan. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from pennsylvania is recognized for 90 seconds. mr. meehan: i thank the chairman and i thank the speaker. i rise in support of the trade act of 2015. 95% of the world's market is outside the united states, and

selling our goods to these markets is critical to america's future prosperity. one in five of american jobs are directly tied to trade. and if we can't knock down the tariffs that are placed on american goods around the country, the world's going to buy these goods elsewhere. simply put a strong trade agenda is essential to america's national security and the economic opportunity of hardworking taxpayers. if you want a strong trade agreement with better protections for u.s. workers, you want trade promotion authority. t.p.a. allows congress to hold the administration accountable and gives congress the chance to vote down a bad deal. without it we're negotiating from a disadvantage, and if we're not setting the rules on global trade, china will. mr. speaker, trade promotion authority means stronger, better trade agreements. i urge my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to support it, because what's happening right now is if we don't have an increasingly aggressive

china in there setting the rules, the trade agreements give us the chances on things like labor things like the environment, things like a fair and open internet. those are the kinds of future things that will create future jobs and keep the world safer and better. i urge my colleagues to support this mr. speaker. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from michigan. mr. levin: i now yield to another valid member of our committee, ms. sanchez from california, a minute and a half. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady from california is recognized for 1 1/2 minutes. ms. sanchez: mr. speaker, i rise to speak against this misguided t.p.a. bill. many of my colleagues have highlighted the reasons to oppose the bill, but i want to focus on two specific fundamental issues, labor and civil rights. there is nothing in this that requires countries to bring their labor laws and regulations into compliance before this deal takes effect. how can we have an agreement that doesn't require everybody to play by the same rules? that's just ridiculous. we need trade agreements that prohibit signatory countries

from murdering jailing, torturing or firing citizens for doing such outlandish things such as trying to unionize and bargain for safer working conditions. enforceable labor provisions tell trading partners that we mean business on labor rights before letting their goods into the u.s. frayed agreements should not continue a race to the bottom for workers. we should be setting the standard. i'm frustrated that t.p.p. negotiations are nearly complete and we are just now giving the administration their marching orders. but here we are and those marching orders should be clear, especially on labor rights. additionally in the ways and means market for this legislation, i offered a commonsense amendment to address the issue of countries whose laws call for imprisonment, torture and even death for the supposed crime of one's sexual orientation. i was baffled to watch every single republican in the committee vote to say it's perfectly acceptable to do business with countries that

have these laws. perhaps it was naive of me to think we could have at least one bright line rule for the most basic of human rights, not to be put to death based on their -- a person's actual or perceived sexual orientation. mr. levin: an additional 30 seconds yielded. ms. sanchez: not to be put to death based on the person's actual or perceived sexual orientation. if you want to do business with the u.s., we shouldn't tolerate such bar barrack behavior. for these -- barbaric behavior. for these reasons i ask my colleagues to vote no against this legislation and i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from ohio. . mr. tiberi: i yield to an important member of the ways and means committee, mr. roskam. mr. roskam: one of two things is going to happen. we are either going to lean forward and claim the best days of america which are ahead of

us or we're going to recede from those and the choice is here and today and i urge us to move forward because i truly believe if we pursue an aggressive trade agenda and the united states leads on that, good things are going to happen. there's another part of the story and we have the opportunity to make history as well. included in the t.p.a. is bipartisan legislation that i offered to shield israel from being the victim of the insidious boycott, difficult investment sections movement in europe. first time that congress is combating boycotts against israel. we saw orange, a company partially owned by the french government recede back from doing business in israel. the language i offered was unanimously adopt and it's simple. if you want to trade with the

united states, you can't boycott israel. i want to thank the chairmen for layer relationship in working with me on these important issues. and i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from michigan. mr. levin: i yield a minute to the gentleman from virginia, mr. beyer. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for one minute. mr. beyer: i rise to stand and boldly as i can for the american worker. 10 million americans are unemployed middle-class wamings have been stagnant. every low wage that could have moved overseas has moved overseas. we have to do something smart, honest brave and bold and based on the unanimous consent of economists and tear down the barriers so they can buy our goods and services and need to strengthen environmental laws.

and bring the law of law to those countries. and we need much stronger intellectual property protections around the world. we have to take globalization head on and can't isolate ourselves. we tried protectionism and got the great recession. mr. speaker, i stand for the american worker and i support the administration's commitment to free trade and lifting the middle class. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from ohio. mr. tiberi: i would like yield one minute, 30 seconds to the gentleman from texas a leader on trade, a past chairman of the trade subcommittee, mr. brady. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from texas is recognized. mr. brady: thank you for your leadership on trade and american success. so who has the power? this is the question. when your family or your business wants to buy a product

who decides what you can buy and at what price, is it you or special interests or union bosses or the government? if you build a better product, come up with a new idea, who has the power to decide where you can sell it around the world, is it you or special interests or government and again the union? american trade is about giving you the power and you the freedom to buy and sell and compete around the world with as little government interference. it's not just enough to buy america but we want to sell our products around the world. when we do we win. when you say we are selling in the u.s. we insist we sell in your countries. when we don't, america grows weaker and our manufacturers and our farmers and local businesses, they get priced out and shut down. so american trade is about our job and our prosperity. this bill sets the rules for

trade so these agreements where everyone benefits, everyone plays by the rsame opportunity. i'm voting yes for more american jobs and more american economic opportunity and less government control of our trade. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from michigan. mr. levin: i now yield a minute to ms. kaptur, long time veteran of this congress. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman from ohio is recognized for one minute. ms. kaptur: i thank mr. levin of michigan and rise in strong opposition to this fast track trade debate. proponents of t.p.a. are trying to lure votes by adding $700 murks million to trade adjustment assistance to take care of unemployed people are going to lose their jobs as more and more billions of our wealth are outsourced. what a if anything leaf.

it's too little for the damage about to be done. the working families and communities are focused on congress today hoping we will stand up and do what's right for america. this outsourcing trade deal rewards the few at the expense of the many. it's a great deal for wall street. it's a great deal for transnational corporations, but for main street and workers, it's another punch to the gut. this week's scenario remind me of the nafta fight to pick up members to deal with cuts and protect the corn industry. but in this deal, we don't protect people. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for an additional 30 seconds. ms. kaptur: there is no protection against human trafficking. that has been stripped out. we have protections for corn, but not for people. in return to secure votes, a few

thousand people may benefit handsomely, but america won't. we will rack up trade deficits as world markets remain close to us. state-run enterprises will eat more of our lunch and for america's working class, millions will be left out in the cold. the t.p.p. will be a pathetic package. i urge no no, no votes. stand up for america. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. tiberi: with the 20 countries we have trade agreements with, we have a trade surplus. with the countries we don't, we have a trade deficit. speaks for itself. in ohio, 89% of our exporters 89% are small and immediate-ium sized companies with less than 500 people and most of these are spent at community colleges and

technical colleges and use that money to train workers and upgrade skills. i wish my dad, who lost his manufacturing job way before nafta, who lost his steel worker job way before any bilateral trade agreement to globalization had t.a.a. to help him get a new job. as the president said in reality, a vote against this t.a.a. bill will be a vote to actually cut funding for community colleges. as the president said yesterday a no vote could potentially kill t.a.a. forever. with that, mr. speaker i yield a minute and 30 seconds to the gentleman from washington state a member of the ways and means committee. mr. reichert. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for 1 1/2 minutes. mr. reichert: americans are asking themselves are things ever going to get better for america? the only answer has to be yes.

and today we begin that process. today it's time for action. today we vote on a trade legislation that is absolutely critical for america's future. today we send a message to the world across this globe a strong message that we are america. we are strong. we are free, and we are united. a yes vote on t.p.a. and t.a.a. today is a vote for a healthy economy, it's a vote for creating jobs, it's a vote for higher wages it's a vote for selling america. that's the message we are going to send across this globe today. america is back and we are going to be strong in this world economy. hardworking taxpayers deserve a government that gives you, mr. speaker, the citizens of this country, freedom choice and

control to pursue their future. every american deserves this, build your own business, hire employees, promotions and provide for your family. mr. speaker it's what real leaders, real leaders will deliver today. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from michigan. mr. levin: i yield a minute to the gentleman from nebraska, mr. ashford. mr. ashford: i believe this is a vote for the ages. my constituents in nebraska are asking me, brad, can we govern, can we come together can we move this country forward? what we do here today will determine how we do move forward as a nation, what kind of country do we leave our children.

yet, in my view, mr. speaker, we are at our best when we reach for the moon. this, in my view is one of those moments, mr. speaker. this is a vote for better jobs, a stronger economy for american workers, for american exceptionalism, i believe, mr. speaker, this is a vote for the ages. please support t.a.a. and t.p.a. to make life better for all americans. thank you, mr. speaker. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from ohio. mr. tiberi: i yield one minute to the gentleman from louisiana mr. boustany, a leader on trade and leader on the ways and means committee and leader for louisiana. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from louisiana is recognized for one minute. mr. boustany: after 1945, u.s. set up the global trading system. and countries around the world are taking advantage of it.

the world's not sitting still. hundreds of trade agreements exist that we only have 20 and we are sitting on the sidelines sitting still. american leadership is needed. if we are going to grow this economy, create good paying jobs for workers and farmers we need to open markets. 95% of the markets are outside the united states. let's be fair. and give them market access. t.p.a. is the catalyst to opening those markets and for growth. and the world's crying for american leadership. i'm afraid american prestige is on the decline. countries are watching us to see how we vote today. we have the opportunity to show that american will lead the global system we cre aed. i think if we don't do this, we have dealt a serious blow to american leadership.

it's a catalyst for american leadership. let's pass t.p.a. mr. levin: could you tell us how much time each side has. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from michigan has 8 minutes remaining and the gentleman from ohio has 5 1/2 minutes remaining. mr. levin: i yield one minute to the gentlelady from new york, ms. velazquez. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady is recognized. ms. velazquez: time and again we are promised trade deals create opportunity. time and again, they instead send jobs abroad. in the first seven years of nafta, new york city's textile shut 7,900 jobs, fast track trade policies have cost the u.s. one million jobs. new york lost a lot of manufacturing jobs since nafta.

why will the transpacific partnership be different? if it is approved, the u.s. will lose 10,000 jobs to just two of the 12 t.p.p. members japan and vietnam. new york already had a $47 billion trade deficit last year. this agreement will make the situation worse. when i go home, i don't hear people telling me we need to rush into another trade bill. the only people pushing fast track are lobbyists and big corporations. 20 seconds. well, that is not who i represent. i would rather stand with new york working families who oppose fast track. vote no. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from ohio.

mr. tiberi: i yield one minute to the gentlelady from south dakota, a leader on the ways and means committee, a leader on trade, i yield one minute to mrs. noem from south dakota. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady is recognized. . mr. knollenberg: we sell 11 1/2 times goods to that country than if there was no agreement in place. trade has been and continues to be an important part of the american -- mrs. noem: we have to continue to expand opportunities to export american-made products to these countries. but first we have to set the rules of the road. the constitution allows the president to negotiate trade agreements but only congress can approve or disapprove them. what we're voting on today ensures that congress sets the priorities and the rules that the president has to follow. it allows an open and transparent process where the public can view any potential trade deal for 60 days before it's sent to congress.

if the president doesn't follow our rules, we can take t.p.a. away, or if we don't like future trade bills we can simply vote them down. but we need to assert the power of congress in the process and ensure that public gets to weigh in down the road. that's what we're doing here today. i urge my colleagues to support this bill. america is counting on it. with that i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from michigan. mr. levin: it's now my pleasure to yield one minute to the gentleman from north carolina, mr. price. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from north carolina is recognized for one minute. mr. price: mr. speaker, i thank my friend for yielding. over the past two years i have been a part of efforts good-faith efforts to write the strongest possible fast track bill. the process the legislation has gone through recently with ways and means democrats denied every opportunity to improve the legislation in committee, while republicans were accommodated in the customs bills with anti-immigrant, anti-environmental provisions, it's moved in precisely the wrong direction from what might

have gained my vote. i plan to vote against t.p.a. today. but i strongly oppose the devious and reckless efforts to bring down t.p.a. by trying to defeat the trade adjustment assistance act. t.a.a. is a good bill which reflects long-standing democratic priorities and the objectionable medicare offset that it contained has been removed. t.a.a. has been critically important in north carolina. i refuse to put displaced workers at risk for the sake of a political tactic. i urge my colleagues, play it straight. support t.a.a. whether or not you support t.p.a. and i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from ohio. mr. tiberi: mr. speaker, i yield one minute to a new member of the ways and means committee, the gentleman from missouri, jason smith. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from missouri is recognized for one minute. mr. smith: thank you mr. speaker. today i rise in support of t.p.a. because trade is too important to southeast and southern missouri to leave in the hands of this president or

any president. t.p.a. would bring more transparency and involvement to the negotiation process and gives congress more authority over the president. without t.p.a., the president can keep congress and the public in the dark on trade negotiations. without t.p.a., the president alone sets the negotiating objectives. without t.p.a., members of congress are not entitled to read the text of negotiating documents during the process. and without t.p.a., the president does not have to publish updated summaries of trade bills during the negotiations. however, with t.p.a. members of congress can be involved in the negotiation process to get the best deal for our folks back home. with t.p.a. for the first time ever, all bills negotiated would have to be public for 60 days before congress votes on them. and with t.p.a. congress directs the negotiating objectives for trade bills. with t.p.a., members of congress will have open access to the text anytime they want.

mr. speaker, we need t.p.a. so that american trade bills can be transparent, effective and enforcive. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from michigan. mr. levin: i yield to the gentleman from california, mr. sherman, one minute. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from california is recognized for one minute. mr. sherman: they have not played it straight as part of legislative procedure. they took a designate bill and split it up into two or three pieces. it is one package. if you're against fast track, vote no on t.a.a. it is not the opponents who came up with this crazy procedure. if they had played it straight we could play it straight, but now we're in a position to use the legislative tactics afforded by this house, pursuant to a rule come up -- that is complicated beyond belief to sink this whole package by voting no on t.a.a. vote no on trade adjustment

assistance because if that happens, republican leadership has said we go home. what's the good of having a little bit of trade adjustment assistance if we lose millions of jobs because we put them on a fast track to asia? vote -- take nancy reagan seriously. when it comes to all three bills today, just vote no. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from ohio. mr. tiberi: i'll reserve. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves his time. the gentleman from michigan. mr. levin: now it's my pleasure to yield a minute to the gentleman from texas, mr. cuellar. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from texas is recognized for one minute. mr. cuellar: thank you very much, ranking member. mr. speaker, president john f. kennedy once said, the u.s. did not rise to greatness waiting for others to lead. economic isolation and political leadership are wholly incompatible.

this is a moment for the united states to lead. i'm voting yes on the trade bills that we have today. trade is good for the united states. 95% of all the consumers are outside the united states. trade is good for texas. last year we had over $289 billion of goods that were exported from texas. 1.1 million jobs were created in texas. millions of other jobs created in the united states. now, who are those small companies -- who are those companies exporting? 93% of those companies in texas are small and medium sized so therefore this is how we create good jobs here in the united states. gentlemen, ladies, let's support trade, fair trade, and, again, i ask you to support the trade bills today. thank you and i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from ohio. mr. tiberi: i'll continue to reserve. the speaker pro tempore: continues to reserve. the gentleman from michigan. mr. levin: how much time do we have, please? the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from michigan has 3 3/4 minutes remaining. mr. levin: i yield two minutes

to the gentlelady from connecticut, ms. delauro. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady from connecticut is recognized for two minutes. ms. delauro: mr. speaker, the debate today is about one issue. it comes down to one question. do we support hardworking americans or do we abandon them? and a vote for these bills is a vote against jobs and it's a vote against wages. the trade adjustment assistance bill is underfunded. it excludes teachers, police officers firefighters and farmers who are hurt when production jobs are shipped abroad go overseas. if we want to protect working families we must stop fast tracking bad trade deals. fast track denies public scrutiny, it denies debate in this house and it relinquishes

our congressional authority and does not allow us to amend a piece of legislation that will have such an effect on people's lives in this country. why is this trade agreement in so much difficulty? why, because this is the first time that a majority of the congress is starting to say we need to prioritize what is happening to the hardworking men and women in our country. what is happening to their lives? what is their struggle? and this trade agreement is only going to hurt their ability to have a job and to increase their wages. if we want to change that, then our job today is to vote down this bill, say no to trade adjustment assistance and say no to fast track and i yield

back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from ohio. mr. tiberi: thank you, mr. speaker. before i yield to the gentleman from kentucky, i just want to point out the record here. no public service worker has ever been certified for t.a.a. under the 2009 stimulus t.a.a. that was passed. and i will also reiterate a statement from the white house with respect to t.a.a., mr. speaker. quote, if you are a member of congress and you vote against t.a.a. this week, you are signing the death certificate for this assistance. with that, mr. speaker, i yield one minute to the gentleman from kentucky, mr. barr. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from kentucky is recognized for one minute. mr. barr: thank you, mr. speaker, for the opportunity to speak in favor of this important legislation for jobs, our economy, transparency and accountability. free trade is critical for my constituents in central and eastern kentucky. more than half a million kentucky jobs are related to international trade. and expanding trade agreements will provide even more opportunities for job growth. our state has a diverse economy that is synonymous with certain products including coal,

bourbon and thoroughbred racehorses. we produce vehicles such as the toyota camry and even aerospace technology. to continue the growth in these signature industries, we need to establish fair and strong rules that hold other nations accountable for their unfair trade practices. we need to tear down barriers that block kentucky goods from foreign markets. what does free trade mean for kentucky? in 2013, two years after our last free trade agreement was completed, the car of the year in south korea was the toyota camry, manufactured in my district in kentucky. let's be clear. the president already has the authority under the constitution to negotiate trade agreements, but by passing t.p.a., we will ensure that congress has the input into the final product and that america will shape the rules of global trade, not china. i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from michigan is recognized and let the chair remind him 1 3/4 minutes remaining. the majority side has two minutes remaining.

the gentleman is recognized. mr. levin: i yield the balance of our time to our colleague from wisconsin. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from wisconsin is recognized for the balance of the time, 1 3/4. mr. pocan: thank you mr. speaker. and thank you, mr. levin. i grew up in an auto town where almost everyone had a family member who worked in the industry. but today there are no cars made there anymore. to me trade deals should be about whether or not we'll fight for american jobs and american worker wages. bad trade deals cost us both. unless we have a say unless the american people have a say, this trade deal will do exactly the same and cost us more jobs. i've read the text and i know where we're at with it as of now. i'd like to see a deal that has better, real protective teeth for labor and environmental law, strong protections for american sovereignty and better protections for food safety and more. bottom line, i want a trade deal that protects american

jobs and lifts our wages right here at home. if we vote for t.p.a., we will have no ability to make it better. for this trade deal or any other trade deal in the next six years under any president if we want the american people to have a voice, a real voice, we must retain our authority to impact trade deals and vote against t.p.a. and all votes that affect it today. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back his time. the gentleman from ohio, two minutes remaining. mr. tiberi: thank you, mr. speaker. let me set the record straight. all three bills that we're voting on today can be read. this is t.p.a.. this is the bill that will hold the president accountable. this president, the next president. this is the bill that tells the administration what we expect.

this is the bill that congress inserts itself into to the president's negotiating. listen ladies and gentlemen, the world is trading. the world is globalized. the world's globalized long before america decided to pass nafta long before. and in fact nafta in 1993, the year before nafta took effect, the u.s. had a steel trade deficit of three million net tons with canada. 2003, the u.s. had a steel trade surplus of $11.2 million net tons with canada and mexico. nafta's benefited the north american steel industry. total u.s.-canada steel trade has increased 99% from 1993 to 2014. total u.s.-mexico steel trade has increased 352% between 1993

and 2014. that's why the steel industry in america supports this bill along with the enforcement that we're going to debate in a little bit. in ohio, honda of america is a net exporter is a net exporter. this is about jobs. this is about allowing those people those workers some of my constituents in libertyville to build more cars in ohio to send them overseas. the only way we do that is to break down barriers. more jobs. listen, i get job loss. my dad lost his job of 25 years. ladies and gentlemen, we need to pass t.p.a. to increase the number of jobs. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back his time. all time for debat >> debate on a series of

measures. the first vote on assistance who workers might lose their jobs. president obama had been pushing democrats to pass it. failed by 126-302. we could see it brought up again early next week. fast track trade authority for the t.p.p. john boehner brought up a motion to reconsider the trade assistance which could come back up for a vote next week. here's the speaker on the the motion to reconsider.

the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from michigan seek recognition? mr. levin: mr. speaker. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from michigan seek recognition? mr. levin: so we can all hear, read what the motion is. the speaker pro tempore: on the question to reconsider the motion just made by the gentleman from ohio. the clerk will re-report the motion. the clerk: the house reconsider the vote on the question of concurring in the motion in the senate amendment. the speaker pro tempore: the question is on the motion. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair the ayes have it. mr. levin: ask for a recorded

vote. the speaker pro tempore: gentleman requests a recorded vote. those favoring a recorded vote will rise. a sufficient number having arisen, a recorded vote is ordered. further proceedings on the preceding question will be postponed. >> some of the action of just a short time ago in the house before they adjourned. after the house, majority leader said the fight to approve fast track trade promotion authority is not over. he spoke to the press and the chair of the ways and means committee. here's a look. mr. mccarthy: i'm disappointed that t.a.a. did not pass. we are not done with it and have

the opportunity to bring it back. i'm proud of the bipartisanship. this is very important to the entire world. while we have not had this authority, there have been 100 agreements and america has been part of zero. if we want to improve this economy and expand our ability for jobs and american trade, we need to finish this job. the mr. ryan: -- mr. scalise: american trade is crit call for the ability of our country to be able to sell our products across the world and for american workers, because if our workers are able to compete on a level playing field we will win on every front. what you saw was a strong showing that came together and said american trade is important and sent a message to our allies in asian europe who want to knock down barriers and tired of

china writing the rules and want america to play a leadership role. the president has the votes to come up and pass t.a.a. you saw strong republicans that recognize how important it is in global leadership for america to lead on trade. mr. ryan: i'm very proud of this congress today and proud of the house republican caucus and also very proud and thankful for the pro-trade democrats that kept their word and stuck with it in this process. america is being watched as to whether or not america is going to lead in the world. and i think this sent the right signal. the president has work to do with his party to complete this process. this isn't over yet. and we hope they can get together and make sure that we finish this so america is back leading.

our constituents are expecting us to make a difference. they need more opportunity. we need to open markets and write the rules. this is what is at stake. and that's why i'm so proud of our caucus today of the pro trade proponents today and i hope the democrats understand the consequences and get together with the president and finish this as soon as possible. >> some of the g.o.p. leaders speaking earlier. although the trade adjustment assistance did not pass the house, fast track and customs did pass the house. we spoke with a reporter on capitol hill for more details. >> reporter with politico and the bills and legislation on capitol hill.

adam, we just saw on the house a lot of action on the trade deals. the t.a.a., adjustment assistance not passing in the house but the t.p.a. passing. what happened here? >> there is a rule for all these trade bills that house republican leadership put together and the rule is that in order to proceed to the fast track of the trade promotion authority bill and third customs bill, they have to vote on a trade adjustment assistance renewal. and that program gives job training benefits to workers who are displaced, out of their jobs as a result of trade deals. so that vote failed. and then as a result, the other two votes, they were voted on sort of on a symbolic vote but those votes did not actually

pass those bills. >> anything you know about the behind the scenes and back and forth and why they decided to take up that bill again? >> the president came to the capitol and met with the democratic caucus and urged his fellow democrats to vote for t.a.a. not to spite t.p.a. you supported this program in the past and should support it in the future and shouldn't just vote t.a.a. down to defeat t.p.a. that seemed to fall on deaf ears and democrats disregarded what the president had asked them to do and voted against t.a.a. and basically to block t.p.a. the path forward now they are going to come back next week, early next week they'll vote on

t.a.a. again under the same rule. so that will be -- they will be able to use the votes on t.p.a. which passed and use the vote on customs, which also passed, they can kind of preserve those victories. but they'll have to bring back t.a.a. and the challenge is how are you going to get so many democrats to reverse their votes. and there is a lot of skepticism that that is going to work. earlier today the pro-trade democrats led by representative ron kind said there is still a lot of room in our caucus in the republican caucus to get that t.a.a. vote passed, but i think no one is under any illusion that it will be pretty difficult, that even if they

bring the vote back up, to pass it. >> the bill goes onto the senate why? >> there a number of amendments in the customs bill basically the whole plan originally was not to conference the t.p.a. bill. they want to get it to the president's desk as soon as possible. because they are trying to wrap up this transpacific partnership deal where that would be necessary, that trade promotion authority would be necessary to get that through congress and don't want to waste any time getting it to the president's desk. they amended the t.p.a. bill that came out of the senate on a few points here in the house but all those amendments were put onto the customs bill to basically preserve that bill from having to go through second procedural step.

>> at the end of this, this is a fail for the president. he has been lobbying for this trade package. what does that say about his power and also the minority leader's role, nancy pelosi? >> i think the minority leader has been -- today was the first day you heard her say her position on these bills. she withheld any sort of judgment on these bills, at least publicly. she hasn't said which way she would vote for them and had conversations between the white house and the cabinet and members of congress. she calls it getting it to a path to yes. but you saw that she ultimately sided with the majority of her party on this and voted against it. but the president and his cabinet have been lobbying these bills for a long time.

they have been sending cabinet members up to the hill for meetings. the president himself has engaged with members via phone calls and other -- in other ways, even you know, people on trips. he took members to g-7 in germany, couple who had declared their support, but all that, as you saw, it didn't result in the result that he wanted. >> thanks for the roundup on all of this. we will keep following you. look for your writing in politico.com. [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2015] [captioning performed by national captioning institute] >> president obama releasing a statement a short time ago saying republicans and democrats in the house voted to help the united states negotiate and enforce strong high standard

trade deals that are good for american workers and good for american businesses. that's a good thing. he said new trade agreements should go in hand in hand to american workers. trade adjustment assistance would give 100,000 american workers to vital support but it's currently scheduled to expire soon. republicans and democrats in the senate have renewed it. republicans and democrats failed to renew it. here's more reaction from the white house during the daily briefing.

mr. earnest: first is, we -- the house of representatives to support trade promotion authority. there are many people skeptical whether or not republicans and democrats will come together. and on a policy issue that everybody acknowledges is really complicated. and politically fraught. but we are gratified that we were able to advance that this legislation through bipartisan support. and we had 28 house democrats who voted for that bill. that is significantly overperforms expectations. there was a lot of skepticism of how much democratic support the president would get. and getting 28 house democrats is a good sign of the kind of bipartisan majority that the president was seeking to build. now at the same time, as many of

you have written about already, i also feel a little like yogi beara. many of you who are frequent visitors, you will recall on may 12, i walked out here to answer your questions about how the democratic leader of a body of congress had handed the president a substantial legislative defeat on a significant policy priority that the president had identified. and i'm walking out here on june 12 prepared to answer your questions about your perception that the democratic leader of a body of congress has handed the president a legislative defeat. at the time, you recall that i described the situation as a legislative procedural snafu. and to the surprise of a very

few, another procedural snafu has emerged. these are endemocratic to the house of representatives. i say that as someone who doesn't watch the floor of the house, but the president just determined and i think as was evident from his visit to capitol hill this morning to build a bipartisan majority to make sure that we're living up to our commitment as democrats to fight for middle class families. that's the reason this president is in this office. as the president pointed out in the democratic caucus today he wasn't elected by the chamber of caucus or endorsed by the nfib. the president is the president of the united states today because of his commitment to fight for working families and expand opportunities for working families. that's the reason he got this

job in the first place and re-elected and going to keep it top of his agenda and when we are going to walk the walk, it is important for republicans and democrats to come around together around trade assistance. that's a problem, because republicans have traditionally trade adjustment assistance and republicans enjoy both the house and the senate. democrats want to make sure we are looking out. we need to make sure that trade adjustment assistance doesn't last. we aren't just going to extend the program but significantly expand it. the proposal that's before the house right now would nearly double that program in size and according to an analysis that has been put up by the white house today, this is a program that will benefit 100,000 american workers each year for

the next six years. that is a substantial benefit to middle class families that are willing to go and make sure they can get the training they need to go and compete for good middle class jobs. it is today and we are going to continue to make that case in the house to build a bipartisan majority in the house for that legislation. that is a slightly longer wind-up than i intended. to your questions. reporter: let's start with leader pelosi. how disappointed is the president that she turned against this legislation after remaining uncommitted for so long and making a personal appeal to her. what happened here? mr. earnest: the president has enjoyed a very long warm productive relationship with nancy pelosi. as the speaker of the house she

helped shepherd in one of the most substantial progressive legislative agendas in history that under her watch walking -- working closely with president obama, we prevented a second great depression. we reformed the health care system in a way that has -- the benefits of which are becoming clear every day and bigger every day. she presided over the house of representatives that voted to reform wall street, to make sure that taxpayers would not be on the hook for bailing out big banks. she worked legislatively with the administration to end don't ask, don't tell and these are things that the president is quite proud of. legislative achievements that required the skillful leadership of then nancy pelosi. since that time, there have been

other important -- there has been additional important progress on other priorities that the president has i had fide the fiscal cliff, to protecting the president's ability to prevent iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon. i don't know if anybody wants to talk about the iran negotiations but if they do, i would like to remind you because of a letter that was written and signed by just about every democrat in the house of representatives, the president feels confident that he will be able to use diplomacy to prevent iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon. there has been an active effort by some in congress to interfere, but because house democrats are prepared to stand strong with the president, we can accomplish that goal. i don't think there is anybody who thinks that is going to be threatened. what is also true, we will make

an acombress i have case to all the house democrats including leader pelosi why it's important for them to support trade adjust mfment assistance. reporter: what is the president to try to turn that around? mr. earnest: the president has spent a lot of time talking to members of congress about these issues being a priority and the fact is as i mentioned at the top, making sure that workers have access to trade adjustment assistance is a top priority of the president. the truth is it's a top priority of every democrat. last time it was on the floor of the house of representatives, it wasn't a situation that many democrats voted for it, every democrat voted for it, including 125 democrats who are still in office. as i mentioned earlier, we shouldn't renew what they voted for three years ago or four years ago, we're suggesting that they should actually support a

legislative package that would significantly enhance it. it would almost double the size of the cap freeing up additional funds to help workers. it would allow 17,000 workers over the 18 months had their benefits denied. so that's an indication that this particular program can do a lot for middle class families and there are a lot of democrats in the house of representatives who ran for that job specifically to benefit the middle class families and make sure they had a voice and fighting for them in washington, d.c.,. we have a strong case in terms of getting a bipartisan majority for trade adjustment assistance. reporter: what happens if t.a.a. can't pass. does the senate get back involved or what is the strategy? mr. earnest: there will be a lot of conversations between white

house officials and the president today and over the weekend and possibly into early next week. figuring out the legislative procedure will be the responsibility of the legislature. but the white house will be involved in those conversations because this is a priority that the president has identified. reporter: is there any concern in his meeting backfired. some democrats leading that meeting that the president trying to impugn their integrity when he told them to play it straight. is he worried that he may have frayed relations snr mr. earnest: not at all. the president had a productive visit with the house democratic caucus today and he delivered a very strong case about helping those members of congress understand precisely why he was strongly supportive of making

sure that we're expanding economic opportunity for every american and opening up goods and services and explained as a young man left new york and traveled to the south side of chicago where he tried to help a community deal the closing of steel plants. and he talked about all the work he had done to try to help that community confront the powerful forces of globalization. he went on to talk about how as a candidate for the united states senate, he traveled toll illinois with then congressman, democratic congressman lane evans and the president spent a lot of time with citizens in that community who are dealing with the closhe issue of maytag plant. that is a plant that moved to mexico and talked about the impact that had on the community and middle class families. and the president said he ran

for this office determined to go and fight for and determine to fight for the people he met in illinois. and that strategy of passing the most progressive trade promotion authority bill that has ever been considered by the congress is an important part of that strategy. it doesn't eliminate the need for congress to make progress on other economic priorities, from raising the minimum wage, passing early childhood education, immigration reform. those all continue to be important priorities. and the president is confident that he continues to have loyal partners in the democratic caucus when it comes to those issues. but the fact is, we haven't seen cooperation from republicans on those priorities, but on this one, we have. and the president strongly encouraged democrats to make up

their own mind and when they did, to play it straight. reporter: going away from trade. secretary kerry was released from the hospital today and went home. do you know when he is expected to come to washington and whether or not he is expected to participate in talks with iran? mr. earnest: i don't have an update in terms of secretary kerry's schedule. you can check with the state department. they may have some more details. we are pleased to see that secretary kerry is slated to be discharged from the hospital today if he hasn't been already. i think that's an indication that he is living up to his reputation as someone who is determined to get back into his office and determined to get back on the job. and secretary kerry is tough. he benefited from a little bit

of rest while in the hospital and has been working hard during the last couple of weeks and i think he understands the long list of priorities waiting for him when he gets back on the job. >> there's no plans to have someone in his place? >> no. there's no -- it's not clear that that's necessary. >> you came out with a midwest optimism but in reality, was it a good day for the president? he does not have anything on his desk signed and he has an uphill battle, has to get two votes on tuesday to get something to his desk is my understanding. and a vote today -- the vote today was overwhelming, an overwhelming defea