I do that mindful of some of the protests that have been out there about our global trade policy and even somewhat in support of some of the complaints that people have said about trade policy.

I think it is absolutely correct to look around the world and say what can we do to help improve human rights, to help improve labor standards, to help make sure that the entire globe protects the environment. And I think these issues need to be brought up more often in international discussions, not just involving trade, but in all discussions with other countries.

Mr. Speaker, what can we do to help improve those things? I rise today just to remind people that even though those issues are important, we cannot forget the importance of open markets. It starts with the simple fact that 96 percent of the people in the world live someplace other than the United States of America, while at the same time, here in the U.S., we manage to account for 20 percent of the world's consumption.

If we are going to grow economically, if we are going to create more jobs, those statistics make it abundantly clear that we are going to have to get access to some of those other 96 percent of the people in the world.

We need to get access to their markets. We need to reduce barriers, open access to trade to help grow the economy. And I do not think people understand completely the benefits that trade have brought and the role they have played in the strong economy that we now enjoy.

I just think that while we are working to improve labor conditions, working to improve human rights and environment, we can also open up other markets to our trade. And the best example of this, and I support the comments of the gentleman from California (Mr. DOOLEY), my colleague who came before me, is the China PNTR trade agreement.

All of the concerns we have heard about trade in previous agreements, a lot of them focus on the fact that it is a one-sided trade agreement. We open our markets, but other countries do not open theirs. This is actually the first trade agreement that goes the other way. China opens their markets by reducing their barriers across the board in a wide variety of goods and services that will increase our access to the single largest market in the world, 1.3 billion people.

This is a great trade agreement that actually will help us here in the U.S., and we need to recognize it for that. We also need to recognize how engagement helps move us forward.

Mr. Speaker, turning down PNTR for China will not do one thing to improve human rights, labor conditions or environmental standards in China. In fact, if you listen to the human rights activists over there, and if you listened to people over in that corner of the world, isolating China will send them in exactly the opposite direction.

Taiwan, in particular, we have heard a lot about how we cannot support this agreement, because of how bad China has treated Taiwan; and I agree that there have been many bad actions by China towards Taiwan. The Taiwanese, the recently elected president, an outspoken advocate for independence for Taiwan, someone who has run against China many, many times strongly supports the U.S. favoring PNTR for China, because he understands that engagement is the policy that will best protect him from Chinese aggression if they choose to go that route.

He wants China to be connected to the rest of the world so that they cannot afford to act in a way that forces the rest of the world to back away from them. So you can have a good trade agreement and also improve human rights, labor conditions, and the environment; but this argument goes beyond the specifics of the China Trade Agreement, even though I think it will be a watershed moment in this country to see whether or not we are going to go forward and embrace engagement and embrace overseas markets or drift back into a dangerous isolation that could push us into a bipolar world.

It is a basic philosophy of whether or not opening markets is open and beneficial. I think there is a lot of statistics out there that show that access to trade helps improve the economy across the board. This is not an isolated few who benefit from it. When we have an economy with 4 percent unemployment, 2 percent inflation, and growth as high as 6 or 7 percent, that benefits everybody in this country. 

Mr. Speaker, we cannot lose sight of the importance of opening overseas markets to our goods. And it goes beyond economics. It is also a matter of national security. We should be concerned about the rest of the world, whether or not countries like Vietnam, Sub-Saharan Africa, other countries in the Third World grow and prosper. If they do not have access to our markets, their people will never be able to rise out of poverty. They will never be able to generate the type of economy that they need in order to have any level of prosperity whatsoever.

This is important for two reasons. One, if we can grow a vibrant middle class in places like Sub-Saharan Africa and beyond, they are in a position to buy our stuff and help our economy grow as well. If they are in poverty, we cannot get access to those markets because there is no one to buy.

Beyond economics, it is also important to keep the peace. If countries are impoverished, that is what leads to revolution and war. We have to help them grow up so that we can keep peace and stability in the world. Trade is important. Labor, human rights, environment, absolutely important. But let us not forget the importance of opening our markets for global stability and for a strong economy in the U.S.