A resolution expressing the sense of the Senate that the President should work with the Government of the United Kingdom to conclude negotiations for a comprehensive trade agreement between the United States and the United Kingdom that the President should work with the President of the European Commission to conclude negotiations for a comprehensive trade agreement between the United States and the European Union.

Mr. President, for more than 100 years, throughout times of change, tumult, and uncertainty, there has been a constant: the special relationship between the United States and the United Kingdom.

The UK has been one of our staunchest and most loyal allies. We have stood beside each other through two World Wars and the Cold War. In the 21st century, the United States and the United Kingdom have become even stronger friends and partners, both in the fight against global terrorism and for freedom, peace, and prosperity.

Now an opportunity lies before us to strengthen the relationship more than ever by securing a free-trade agreement between our two nations, which is the purpose of the resolution before us today. The trading relationship between our countries is already really strong. For hundreds of years, it has been a force for economic prosperity and security for us both.

In just 2019, the total trade in goods and services between our two countries totaled $273 billion, and the United Kingdom was the seventh largest trading partner of the United States in goods. Figures from that same year show that U.S. trade with the United Kingdom resulted in a $21.8 billion trade surplus.

The United States and the United Kingdom, in fact, share the single largest bilateral trade and investment relationship in the world. And now, with the UK's newfound ability to negotiate independent free-trade deals, we have the opportunity to grow that relationship even more.

A free-trade agreement would allow even more goods and services to flow even more easily between our two countries. It would allow for expanded commercial partnerships and greater investments in emerging industries. It would serve as an even greater engine of prosperity and economic liberty on both sides of the Atlantic Ocean.

This is a no-brainer, and it would be a tremendous asset in the midst of the economic and geopolitical challenges we face today. The pandemic and supply chain turmoil have proven that friends are invaluable in a pinch. While many global relationships have been unsteady and many governments don't know what their future trading relationships will look like, the United Kingdom has been a stalwart and secure partner with the United States.

Furthermore, it could not be a better move in the age of great power competition with China. We will not beat China by trying to be like China in imposing centralized command-and-control grips on the economy that will strangle trade and trample free enterprise. Instead, we should do what we have always done best: prioritize free, open, and fair commerce with friendly nations, as the G7 this past weekend confirmed.

At the conclusion of the summit, the group, as a whole, agreed to ``secure our future prosperity by championing freer, fairer trade within a reformed trading system.'' And the United States and the United Kingdom signed a New Atlantic Charter in which both countries committed to take actions ``enabling open and fair trade between nations.''

Securing a mutually beneficial trade agreement with one of our oldest and closest allies would be in the best interest of us all. As President Biden himself recently said: ``America's alliances are our greatest asset, and leading with diplomacy means standing shoulder-to- shoulder with our allies and key partners once again.''

On this point, I could not agree with President Biden more. Congress can seize this opportunity by supporting the resolution before us today. It is a simple, straightforward resolution declaring the sense of the Senate that the United States has and should have a close and mutually beneficial trade relationship with the United Kingdom without interruption and that the President, with the support of Congress, should lay the groundwork for a future trade agreement between the United States and the United Kingdom.

Borrowing a phrase from Prime Minister Boris Johnson, after his first face-to-face meeting with President Biden at the summit this past weekend, the United States-United Kingdom relationship is ``indestructible.'' No two nations have worked more closely together. No two peoples have done more to expand and defend liberty or to achieve peace and prosperity.

Throughout history, this partnership has steadied the world through some of its greatest perils. It can continue to do so today if only we let it. The American and British peoples have the opportunity to once again join forces and emerge from the challenges we face stronger than ever for the benefit of our countries and nations across the globe. To that end, I urge each of my colleagues to support this resolution.

And I ask unanimous consent that the Finance Committee be discharged from further consideration, and the Senate now proceed to S. Res. 134. I further ask that the resolution be agreed to, the preamble be agreed to, and that the motions to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table.

Mr. President, I appreciate the comments and the insight provided by my friend and colleague, the distinguished Senator from Oregon.

As to the point regarding our relative negotiating power and the wisdom of approaching this task right now, it is important to remember this resolution doesn't purport to offer the details of any such deal. It calls for a free-trade agreement. There is nothing surrendered by that. There is, however, a lot to be gained by that in signaling that we want to continue to have an open, free, and fair relationship with the United Kingdom.

As to the process concerns articulated by my friend and colleague, while he has expressed some concerns about the process, I must provide some evidence to the contrary.

Over the past year, my staff has communicated with the Senate Finance Committee staff, staff on both sides of the aisle, upward of half a dozen times. They have also pitched changes to assuage concerns about language multiple times but never received any definitive responses.

Furthermore, I have worked with colleagues on the other side of the aisle to craft almost identical draft language on United States-United Kingdom trade that was included in S. Res. 117, on the Good Friday Agreement, which passed before this body without objection. There is no reason why we can't reach a similar compromise on this legislation, and I stand ready and willing to work with my colleague from Oregon to do so

(At the request of Mr. Schumer, the following statement was ordered to be printed in the Record.)

Mr. President, I would like to call up S. Res. 134, as amended, my resolution urging the President to bring negotiations on a free-trade agreement between the United States and the United Kingdom to a mutually advantageous conclusion.

I have been working on the Senate floor and behind the scenes for several years now trying to get this measure adopted and a trade deal signed. Things are finally moving. The message to the President, if approved with unanimous consent of the Senate, could not be any more timely.

President Biden recently announced that after a delay of more than a year, we are finally going to resume trade negotiations with the United Kingdom. It is not often these days that I am really excited about all the news coming from the White House, but this one is absolutely thrilling to hear. I am very pleased with it.

For more than 100 years, throughout times of great change, tumult, and uncertainty, our partnership between the United States and the United Kingdom--sometimes referred to as the ``special relationship''-- has been constant. Through two world wars and the Cold War, through centuries of economic partnership that have forged the world's single- largest bilateral trade and investment relationship, the UK has been our staunchest and our most loyal ally.

Now, with the UK's newfound ability to negotiate independent free- trade deals and the President's commitment to resume negotiations on that front, the stars are aligned, and we have the opportunity to grow that relationship even further. This Senate resolution is the next step, calling on the President to bring those negotiations to the finish line. What could be better for American jobs, American prosperity, and American security than securing such a deal? This is what our country needs. This is what my home State of Utah needs.

Let me tell you a little bit about what that relationship means for the people back in my State, back in Utah. Almost 11,000 Utahns are employed directly by UK companies and their subsidiaries, and nearly 40,000 jobs are supported by exports from Utah to the United Kingdom. The United Kingdom is our largest export market, and we sent over $9 billion worth of exports just in 2019 alone.

Our credit and financial services industries also thrive from our trade relationships with the UK. Imagine what it would do for Utah and for the rest of the country if we made that trade even easier.

In this age of great power competition with China, we need to work closely with our allies renewing old friendships and crafting new ones.

As we have seen, our supply chains are in a precarious position, and they need to be redoubled and reinforced before we face the next calamity. Whatever you might have heard, trade is one of the best ways to reinforce our supply chains, and so what we need is a proliferation of free-trade agreements with countries around the globe. The United Kingdom would certainly be on that list, and, in fact, it should be chief among them.

So now I ask my colleagues to join me, using the full voice and the authority of the U.S. Senate, to urge the President to proceed full steam ahead on a deal. Throughout history, the partnership between our countries has steadied the world through some of its greatest perils, and it can continue to do so today if only we let it. The American and British peoples have the opportunity to once again join forces and emerge from the challenges we face today and to do so stronger than ever for the benefit of our countries and nations across the globe.

To that end, Mr. President, as if in legislative session, I ask unanimous consent that the Finance Committee be discharged from further consideration and the Senate now proceed to S. Res. 134. I further ask that the Lee substitute amendment to the resolution be considered and agreed to; the resolution, as amended, be agreed to; the Lee amendment to the preamble be considered and agreed to; the preamble, as amended, be agreed to; that the Lee amendment to the title be considered and agreed to; the title, as amended, be agreed to; and that the motions to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table.

Mr. President.

I appreciate the insights shared by my friend and distinguished colleague, the Senator from Connecticut, with whom I enjoy working on countless issues, but I want to offer a little bit of additional context here.

Senator Menendez and I have worked together for some time now to address how any such trade agreement with the United Kingdom might take into account the obligations we have to Ireland under the Good Friday Agreement.

Just to be very clear, our resolution does not make any statement on elements of the transatlantic relationship outside the jurisdiction of U.S. sovereignty. So this shouldn't affect that. Those two things shouldn't be tied together.

Brexit and the debate surrounding the Northern Ireland Protocol are issues exclusively between the UK and the EU. This resolution is interested only, exclusively, in making a statement on working closely with a longstanding and stalwart ally and trade

partner. So we certainly would welcome a similar resolution on U.S.-EU trade, and I would be happy to work collaboratively with my friend from Connecticut or with any other colleague on either side of the aisle on that project.

If there are additional concerns here, I would love to know what those are immediately so that we can resolve this expeditiously. As I said earlier, I have been working on this resolution for at least 2 years now, and I would hate to see it blocked because of a quibble that we have already worked with the Foreign Relations Committee, the staff across the aisle on that committee, to address. I mentioned that this is important to my State of Utah. It is also important to Connecticut.

In Connecticut, the United Kingdom is directly responsible for over 22,000 jobs, and it supports another 12,000 through Connecticut goods and services that cross between those two countries.

So I think this would be good for Connecticut. It would be good for Utah. It would be good for the entire country, and I hope we can get it done. I am disappointed we weren't able get it done today. I am going to keep moving ahead on this because it needs to happen.

Mr. President.

Mr. President, reserving the right to object, Senator Lee is right--the relationship between the United States and Britain is unique, and it is special. They are often the first to come to our aid when we are in need, when we need partners around the globe. So it brings me no pleasure to come to the floor to object to this resolution being passed at this time, partly because I think there will be a right time for the Senate to come together unanimously and express our support for a U.S.-Britain free-trade agreement. But I want to spend 1\1/2\ minutes telling you why this is not the time.

We are having this debate because Britain has chosen to leave the European Union. Previous to Britain's departure, we were pushing for a U.S.-EU trade agreement that would have brought benefits to Britain but also to the rest of the continent.

Today, we are talking about a bilateral agreement because Britain is leaving the European Union, but they have not yet fully left in the sense that there is an agreement connected to their exit that Britain has not yet fulfilled. One of the most important aspects of that agreement relates to the Good Friday Agreement, the Good Friday Agreement being a seminal achievement of American diplomacy that brought to an end decades of troubles and violence in and around Northern Ireland.

The UK and EU negotiated what is called the Northern Ireland Protocol as part of the EU withdrawal agreement. That arrangement was intended to preserve the Good Friday Agreement and to ensure that you would never have a hard border between the Republic of Ireland and Northern Ireland. Under the protocol, it was agreed that Northern Ireland would continue to follow EU rules on food safety and other products standards to prevent those customs checks across the border. The checks, instead, would take place on goods entering Northern Ireland from England, Scotland, or Wales.

The problem is that the British Government right now wants to change the deal and to get rid of most of the checks, to reduce customs procedures in order to allow goods to move more freely. But this has created a political crisis because it threatens to reerect that hard border that could unfortunately stimulate a reemergence of conflict. It has already been incredibly destabilizing in Northern Ireland. The leader of the largest unionist party has threatened to quit the government if the current protocol is not replaced.

This is not an insignificant risk, and our priority should be, before cheerleading and championing a free-trade agreement, to make sure that Britain's commitment to protect the Good Friday Agreement as part of their departure from the European Union is fulfilled.

So I look forward to the time when we can come together, Republicans and Democrats, and support the entering into of discussions for a free- trade agreement between the United States and Britain, but I would submit that this is not the right time. Right now, we need to be firm in our commitment to make sure that the conditions of withdrawal from the European Union specifically with respect the Good Friday Agreement are fulfilled, and only once those conditions are fulfilled should we as a body make that full commitment to this free-trade agreement.

Let's make sure that we not do anything to jeopardize what has been decades of productive peace and peace discussions in and around Northern Ireland.

For that reason, I would object.

Mr. President, reserving the right to object, first, this resolution--and I am just going to make a few key points here--is on the trade agreement with the UK, and it is a question of international trade, which falls under the jurisdiction of the Finance Committee.

The committee has not been consulted on the resolution so Senators have not had adequate time to consider it. Needless to say, the prospect of reshaping the American economy with sweeping trade deals is not something that should just rocket past the committee of jurisdiction.

Second, I have serious concerns about blessing a potential trade agreement with the United Kingdom when the contents of such an agreement are still unknown. I stated a number of times that there are serious issues that need consideration with respect to our economic relationship with the United Kingdom. That cannot happen if the debates play out in a slapdash process on the floor of the Senate.

For example, the United Kingdom has not only proposed but implemented a discriminatory digital service tax since entering negotiations with the United States. What they are doing is opportunistically looting American technology companies before these measures are shut down by an FTA or another agreement. The UK is also considering other discriminatory policies.

The UK must commit to abandoning these unfair policies, which are serious barriers to trade, a detriment to the special relationship, harmful to American workers, as a precondition of honest and worthwhile negotiations.

Otherwise, if Senators are going to rush to hand out big promises on trade talks, they risk surrendering America's negotiating position on these key issues without getting anything in return.

So I don't see the wisdom in undermining good-paying American jobs and American businesses with a trading partner that has thus far seen no reason to back away from discriminatory measures. For those reasons, I object.

Mr. President, as if in legislative session, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Finance be discharged from further consideration and the Senate proceed to S. Res. 134.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Lee substitute amendment to the resolution be considered and agreed to.

Mr. President, I know of no further debate on the resolution, as amended.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Lee amendment to the preamble be considered and agreed to; the preamble, as amended, be agreed to, the Lee amendment to the title be considered and agreed to, the title, as amended, be agreed to, and the motions to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table.