Russian World Trade Organization Commitments Verification Act of 2012

Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

I want to make a number of points, but first to join with the chairman of

the committee. We have worked hard on this legislation on a bipartisan basis, and also with the Senate.

I think these are the important points, if I might say so. First of all, I urge that we take each trade agreement very much on its own, maybe not completely looking at other agreements but assessing the merits of each particular agreement. And when you look at this agreement on its merits, it's clear, I urge, we should be supportive.

If you look at the flow of trade that will be enhanced by this legislation, it's clear that it will be beneficial to our country. The major exports from our country to Russia are machinery, motor vehicles, and aircraft. These are products made in America by American companies and by American workers. So essentially, this will enhance our ability. Russia, in terms of taking this on its own, is already in the WTO, and the question is whether we will be able to access their markets.

The next point: there is also a question of enforcement. Trade agreements by themselves will not be enough. There has to be built in strong enforcement and a willingness to enforce. And this agreement, with the help of colleagues, some of whom will be here to speak today, this agreement has strengthened enforcement provisions. Those were worked out with the Senate, and I want to thank the Senators for working with us. So there is within this agreement not only a guarantee of more flow, but also a guarantee that we have access to the instrumentalities so that we can hold Russia's feet to the fire, if I might say so, in terms of their meeting their obligations.

The next point is this: we've been working on trade issues for a long time. For some of us, trade is more than the flow of goods; it's the structure within which the flow occurs and looking at the benefits of that flow so that we're sure that the impact is a positive one for our businesses and our workers.

Also, it's important to remember that the rule of law in another country is vital, otherwise investment is perilous. The Magnitsky legislation was added here in part in recognition that when you talk about trade, you have to look at a fuller picture. And I want to salute, if I might say so, especially Jim McGovern for his work on this issue. And I also want to thank Mr. Camp, our chairman. I also want to thank those in the Senate for working with us to make sure that this is in this bill, the chair of our Foreign Relations Committee, and also especially Mr. Cardin, who once served on our committee and is now in the Senate and has made this a dedicated effort on his part.

This is a bipartisan effort. I hope that it will set the stage for a successful effort to deal with trade issues now and beyond on a bipartisan basis.

I reserve the balance of my time.

I now yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from the great State of Washington (Mr. McDermott), the ranking member on Trade.

(Mr. McDERMOTT asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

I now yield 9 minutes to the gentleman from Maine (Mr. Michaud) for a colloquy, a gentleman who has worked so hard on trade issues.

I thank the gentleman for yielding.

I very much agree with my colleague from Maine that it's vital to monitor and fully enforce our trade agreements, and I will work with USTR to keep you and other Members of Congress informed when Russia has not fulfilled its commitment, regardless of whether or not the administration has taken formal notice.

As my colleague knows, today's legislation includes reporting requirements on all of Russia's commitments they made prior to joining the WTO, including the reduction of tariffs and other commitments related to manufacturing sectors. I will work with my colleague to make certain that USTR's reports include an evaluation of Russia's manufacturing-related commitments.

I very much agree with you that we must enforce our trading partners' commitments so that our American workers can compete on a level playing field, and I really believe that Mr. Camp, our chairman, and others concur in that. I, too, have been concerned about the effect China's trade relations have had on the U.S. economy.

I will work with you to monitor Russia's compliance and to ensure that U.S. manufacturers get the full benefits of Russia's WTO membership, and I can assure you we will continue to work together to address China's violations as well. This administration has been active in that regard.

As for section 301, I wish to note that I and the ranking member on our Trade Subcommittee, Mr. McDermott, exchanged letters with the U.S. trade rep in July, confirming our rights to request action under section 301. Under section 301, USTR is required to respond to our requests within a fixed timeline. That exchange of letters has already been incorporated into the legislative history of the bill before us today.

I want to thank you, Mr. Michaud, for your arduous efforts.

I reserve the balance of my time.

I yield 2 minutes to another Member who's been so active on trade policy, the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. Neal).

It is now my pleasure to yield 2 minutes to a gentleman who has served so long with distinction on our committee, the gentleman from New York (Mr. Rangel).

(Mr. RANGEL asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Madam Speaker, I now yield 1\1/2\ minutes to another member of our committee from the great State of Oregon (Mr. Blumenauer), who is so active on trade issues.

I now yield 1\1/2\ minutes to another active member of our committee on trade and every issue that comes before us, the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Kind).

I yield the gentleman an additional 30 seconds.

Madam Speaker, could you verify how much time there is on both sides.

Mr. Chairman, I think I'll proceed.

It's now my pleasure to yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Pascrell), another vigorous member of our committee on all issues. We wish your State the best, by the way.

I yield the gentleman an additional 10 seconds.

I yield 3 minutes to the distinguished gentleman from Oregon (Mr. DeFazio), with his passion on all issues.

It is now my pleasure to yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Virginia who is deeply involved in trade issues, Mr. Moran.

It is now my pleasure to yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Tennessee (Mr. Cohen).

I yield the gentleman an additional 15 seconds.

It is now my pleasure to yield 1 minute to a gentleman who has just been sworn in, a colleague of ours from Michigan (Mr. Curson).

This is your maiden speech, and it is my special pleasure to yield to you.

I would ask Mr. Camp if you would yield me an additional 1\1/2\ minutes.

Madam Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time.

I wanted Mr. Curson to finish his statement because of his roots in the labor movement and beyond. We're proud to have you here, and we welcome your statement.

As I close, I want to congratulate everybody who worked on this to try to strengthen it. I also want to say just a word about Jackson- Vanik because this terminates that provision that was a part of the trade bill.

I want to salute everybody over the years who worked to implement what Senator Jackson and Congressman Vanik undertook. Many of us, my late wife and myself, and so many others went to Russia to try to make real that amendment. It showed that trade is more than the flow of goods. We have to look at the structure within which trade operates.

So I close again by attributing so much to people who worked so hard to try to make sure that those who wanted to leave Russia, the Jewish community and beyond, had a chance to live elsewhere and to pursue their lives with dignity.

This is an important moment.

I yield back the balance of my time.

Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Madam Speaker, I urge passage of this bipartisan legislation to ensure that American companies, workers, farmers, and ranchers benefit from Russia's accession to the World Trade Organization. Almost three months ago, Russia became the 156th member of the WTO. Since then, exporters from every WTO member but one--the United States--have been guaranteed the benefit from the concessions that Russia made to join the WTO. These benefits include increased access to Russia's growing market in goods and services, improved protection of intellectual property rights in Russia, Russian animal and plant health rules based on international standards and science, and binding dispute resolution if Russia does not live up to its WTO obligations. If U.S. exporters want to be guaranteed these benefits as well, we must pass this bipartisan legislation and establish permanent normal trade relations with Russia.

This bill would allow us to gain important rights and powerful new enforcement tools with respect to one of the world's largest economies without giving up a single tariff or other concession. We could double or even triple U.S. exports to Russia within 5 years. But until we do, these benefits will go to our foreign competitors while our exporters fall further behind.

With our high unemployment, we cannot afford to pass up any opportunity to increase our exports and create jobs. And the longer we delay in passing this legislation, the more ground our exporters will lose.

I don't dispute that our relationship with Russia has many challenges. On the commercial front, we face weak enforcement and protection of intellectual property rights, as well as discriminatory standards for U.S. agricultural products. Russia's recent adoption of the WTO's rules should address many of these issues, but this bill goes farther by requiring the administration to stay focused on Russia by making sure that it lives up to its WTO obligations, resolves outstanding trade issues with Russia, and improves the rule of law in Russia.

Many of us also have significant concerns with Russia's foreign policy. Much as I believe that Russia does not always act responsibly, I also believe that this legislation cannot be seen as rewarding Russia. Instead, any benefit that is conferred is on U.S. job creators. I also fully share the concerns of many of my colleagues on Russia's abysmal human rights record, and that's why I support adding the Magnitsky legislation to this bill, on the third anniversary of the murder of Sergei Magnitsky while imprisoned.

For all of these reasons, we urgently need to pass this important bipartisan legislation. I urge all of my colleagues to support it.

Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

I thank the gentleman for his comments. Also, I would yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Brady), the distinguished chairman of the Trade Subcommittee.

At this time, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from California (Mr. Nunes), a distinguished member of the Ways and Means Committee.

I yield 2 minutes to a distinguished member of the Ways and Means Committee, the gentleman from California (Mr. Herger).

Madam Speaker, how much time remains?

Thank you.

I yield 2 minutes to a distinguished member of the Ways and Means Committee, the gentleman from Washington State (Mr. Reichert).

At this time I yield 2 minutes to a distinguished member of the Ways and Means Committee, the gentleman from Minnesota (Mr. Paulsen).

At this time I yield 2 minutes to a distinguished member of the Ways and Means Committee, the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Roskam).

Madam Speaker, at this time I yield 2 minutes to the distinguished gentleman from New York (Mr. Grimm).

Madam Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the distinguished gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Kelly).

I yield 2 minutes to a distinguished gentleman from Missouri (Mr. Long).

I yield 2 minutes to a distinguished member of the Ways and Means Committee, the gentleman from New York (Mr. Reed).

At this time, I have no further speakers, and I am prepared to close.

Yes, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Michigan.

I yield myself the balance of my time.

I too want to thank Mr. Levin for his work on this legislation and for his long-time work on Jackson-Vanik. Those were very different times. His leadership there, I think, has paved the way for the effort that we're going to see today--I think a very large bipartisan vote. I appreciate the bipartisanship on this bill.

I also want to thank the gentleman from California (Mr. Dreier), who will be retiring at the end of this Congress, who is the chairman of the Rules Committee, who has been a leader on trade, trade issues, and has really been a mentor to me on these issues since I came to Congress. His leadership will be missed both in the Rules Committee and his intelligent contribution to debate on the floor, as well as his leadership on trade issues.

This truly is, as Mr. Levin said earlier, a bipartisan effort, and many brought it forward: Mr. McGovern, Ms. Ros-Lehtinen, Mr. Cardin, a former member of the Ways and Means Committee now in the Senate. This is the seventh bipartisan trade bill we've had this Congress. Also, not to be forgotten, this moves Moldovan PNTR. Moldova joined the WTO 11 years ago. Finally, we're seeing a resolution and some movement there.

As others have said, Russia is and will be a member of the WTO, regardless of whether or not the United States grants Russia PNTR. The commercial benefits, the jobs that will be created here in the United States because of Russia's accession, are significant if we do grant PNTR. As a WTO member, Russia will be subject to rules and regulations that the WTO creates that they're not subject to now. They must comply with all of their rules and regulations. It helps level the playing field for our workers, our employers, our exporters, and particularly in the areas of discriminatory practices, intellectual property rights, more transparency, implementing uniform rules and customs, all the things that are needed to have a viable economic--a dynamic and equal relationship are important there.

Also, it's important to note that our employers, workers, farmers, ranchers, and employees will not get any benefits of having Russia into the WTO unless we grant this.

This is an important step. It will bring us big gains. As has been said, this establishes tools that will help us ensure Russia's enforcement. And I think particularly also in the area of human rights, it's important that the Magnitsky legislation is a part of this legislation.

I urge support for this bill, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Madam Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.

Madam Speaker, I rise to strongly oppose this legislation. Unfortunately, Congress has ruined an opportunity to overturn an anachronistic impediment to free trade with Russia by attaching to it an interventionist and provocative ``human rights'' bill that will worsen U.S./Russia relations.

With Russia's recent accession to the World Trade Organization (WTO) Congress is obligated to repeal the ``Jackson-Vanik Amendment,'' a 1974 era piece of legislation that sought to condition normal trade relations with the Soviet Union (which no longer exists) upon liberalization of emigration rules for Soviet Jews. WTO members are obliged to eliminate trade barriers with other members. So the repeal and extension of normal trade relations simply should have been a formality. Unfortunately Congress instead took this as an opportunity to meddle in the internal affairs of Russia, which will worsen US/ Russian relations and have a negative economic impact on the United States.

By attaching the so-called ``Magnitsky'' bill to the Jackson-Vanik repeal, Congress will direct the State Department to draw up a list of Russians it believes are responsible for human rights abuses. These people will be denied entry into the United States and have their assets seized by the U.S. government. The implications of this reckless move are stunning.

What is even more dangerous is that the bill directs the U.S. government to also consider ``evidence'' provided by international non- governmental organizations when it determines who should be sanctioned by the U.S. government. Non-governmental organizations are not legal tribunals, and in fact many are politically-motivated pressure groups. Many are funded by governments or political parties and in exchange do their bidding. This ironically reminds one of the ``people's tribunals'' set up under the Soviet system, where evidence was considered irrelevant.

These sanctions in this bill against individuals are the economic equivalent of President Obama's ``kill list.'' Individuals will be placed on this list under dubious and ill-defined criteria, without due process or sound evidentiary requirements.

If this bill becomes law, we should expect a response from Russia and perhaps other of our trading partners--particularly as many of our colleagues have suggested that the Magnitsky bill should serve as a model for our relations with the rest of the world. We might imagine the Russians or the Chinese passing similar legislation, banning Americans from entry and seizing the assets of Americans allegedly involved in ``human rights violations.'' What if they considered the U.S. bombing of Libya, which resulted in the death of thousands of civilians from NATO bombs, such a violation?

If Congress really is concerned about the human rights of prisoners, perhaps they might take a look at the terrible treatment of U.S. Army Private Bradley Manning while incarcerated and awaiting trial. Last year Amnesty International wrote to then-Defense Secretary Robert Gates that Manning's ``inhumane'' treatment while in custody ``undermines the United States' commitment to the principle of the presumption of innocence.'' Congress remains silent.

In reality, this bill is about politics more than human rights. Listening to the debate it is obvious that many supporters of this legislation simply do not like the democratic choices that the Russian people made in recent elections. Therefore they do what they can to undermine the Russian government and encourage ``regime change.'' Again, how would we react?

I encourage my colleagues to join me in opposing this legislation in its current form and to push for a bill that simply extends normal trade relations with Russia without meddling or provoking. When it comes to human rights, the United States should most definitely lead the world by its own example. On that measure, we still have a lot of work to do.

I thank the gentleman for yielding.

Representative DeLauro of Connecticut and I introduced legislation to increase the specifics and the strength of U.S. enforcement efforts of Russia's WTO membership. As our experience with China has shown, if there isn't a robust enforcement mechanism, American jobs will be lost.

I am pleased that the bill being debated today includes similar language to strengthen our enforcement of Russia's WTO membership, but I do have lingering concerns that USTR may be reluctant to fully implement these provisions, both in letter and in spirit.

First, I am worried that USTR may not interpret the bill's reporting requirements in a way that will make it possible for Members of Congress or American businesses to fully understand Russia's WTO commitment. The Working Party Report, alone, is hundreds of pages and is hard to decipher. In addition, I'm concerned that USTR may not include in their report when they decide not to take action against Russia, even when they are not in compliance.

Can you assure me that you will work with me to ensure that Members of Congress and our businesses are made aware of all of Russia's WTO commitments and whether or not they are in full compliance?

I yield to the gentleman.

I thank the gentleman for his answer.

My next concern is that USTR's report that Congress may not give sufficient attention to Russia's compliance with their manufacturing- related commitments. I know you and I share a deep commitment to American manufacturing. Will my friend work with me to ensure that USTR reports to Congress include assessments on their compliance with manufacturing-related obligations?

I thank my friend for his response. And I know it will come as no surprise that I have approached this legislation and debate with skepticism. Since China joined the WTO more than 10 years ago, nearly 2 million U.S. jobs have been shipped overseas. Although I have advocated for and supported U.S. enforcement efforts at the WTO, these actions have not been enough to counter China's persistent trade violation, including their currency manipulation. I do not want us to repeat this mistake with Russia.

I think the enforcement provisions in this legislation are a good start, but it will take a proactive Congress to make sure our businesses benefit from this agreement. Can my friend assure me that he will work with me to use all the tools at our disposal, including section 301 authority, if needed, to make sure that Russia lives up to the WTO commitment?

I appreciate the gentleman's comment, and I look forward to working with him on these issues. You and I have worked closely together on trade enforcement over the past few years, and I sincerely hope this effort between our offices will further strengthen our dialogue and collaboration on trade policy going forward. It will be even more important that we work together to make sure that TPP is a good deal for American workers and that its implementation legislation as well, should it ever reach the floor, include strict enforcement measures.

This legislation represents an unprecedented step towards improving enforcement of our trade agreements. I want to thank you for working with us to improve this legislation and for agreeing to work with me on my outstanding concerns that we currently have. As a result of these improvements and the strong human rights language in the bill, I'll be supporting this legislation when the House votes on it today. And I want to thank the gentleman from Michigan very much for his efforts in that regard.

I thank the gentleman for yielding me this time.

I want to first commend the chairman and the ranking member of the Ways and Means Committee, Mr. Camp and Mr. Levin, for the work they did in getting this legislation to the floor.

I rise in strong support of extending permanent normal trade relations with Russia and Moldova. I also want to commend the chair and the ranking member of the subcommittee, Mr. Brady and Mr. McDermott, for the work that they've done, as well as a gentleman who's not on the floor today--we're going to miss his leadership, he's retiring at the end of this session--Mr. Dreier from California. He's been a great leader on trade policy. He's been a great colleague. We will miss that leadership, and I commend him for his one last lift that he made into making this legislation possible.

In a lot of ways I wish we had passed this before the August recess because every day we delay right now we are losing market share in a large and expanding marketplace in Russia. Our goods, our services, our products, the Made in America goods that we should be exporting right now, we're not until we're able to pass this bill. Russia has already agreed to lower their trade barriers and other nontariff barriers for the entry of our goods.

Just as one example, Great Britain alone over the last couple of years has expanded their exports into the Russian market by over 80 percent. But this legislation will also allow us to enforce rules and have dispute resolution mechanisms that are available through the World Trade Organization, higher rules that Russia now has to comply with.

As another example from my home State of Wisconsin, Russia has, since 2010, shut out all dairy exports that we could make from our country into Russia due to phytosanitary concerns that we view as highly suspect and highly questionable. Now we'll have a mechanism in order to resolve that dispute through the WTO.

Something that is not available to us until we're able to move this legislation here today.

Now, as was pointed out earlier, Governor Romney indicated that Russia, in his view, is America's greatest geostrategic adversary in the 21st century.

I don't know if that's true or not, but I do know that when goods and products cross borders, armies don't. This gives us another tool of diplomatic engagement with Russia, economic engagement with Russia, as well as another piece to what we need to do to get our economy fully functioning and creating the good-paying jobs that we need right here in America at this time.

So I encourage my colleagues to support this. Hopefully, we will have a wide bipartisan vote, and I thank the leadership on this issue.