On The Issues »
Trade

I support free trade because I believe the best way the United States can facilitate social and economic reforms in other countries is through an open dialogue and greater trade. Reform will not come to the developing world through isolation. Free trade leads to a richer and more educated populace, which will lead to more democracy and a desire to be accepted as a full member in the world community.

I support efforts to expand trading opportunities for American businesses. Expanding trade is critical to strengthening our economy. This is especially true in Connecticut, where our businesses exported $12.2 billion worth of goods in 2006, which is up $2.6 billion from 2005, or 27 percent.

U.S. exports of goods and services reached nearly $1.3 trillion in 2005, representing about 10 percent of world trade. Strong trade contributes to rising income and higher quality jobs. More than 12 million U.S. jobs are export-related, including 1 in 5 manufacturing jobs. These jobs pay an average of 13 to 18 percent above the national average.

Since the restoration of trade promotion authority for the President, which gives the President the authority to negotiate bilateral trade agreements and send them to Congress for an up-or-down vote, we have seen substantial progress in the promotion of free trade. We have completed bilateral agreements with Bahrain, Chile, Singapore, Australia, Morocco, Central America, Oman and Peru. Congress still must consider agreements with Colombia, Panama and South Korea.

I will continue to strongly support free trade.

Colombia Free Trade Agreement

I support the FTA with Colombia, which mainly benefits U.S. manufacturers looking to export goods to Colombia. Very few products face tariffs coming into the United States, while many U.S. products face tariffs going into Colombia. Enactment of the FTA will eliminate over 80 percent of tariffs immediately and will phase all tariffs out over 10 years.

I strongly opposed H.Res. 1092, a resolution the House passed by a vote of 224 to 195 that postponed the consideration of the Colombia FTA indefinitely. Under previous trade promotion authority rules, free trade agreements negotiated prior to June 30, 2007 enjoyed preferential status that required Congress to have an up-or-down vote on the agreement within six months of it being submitted to Congress.

In an export-dependent state like Connecticut, it seems counterintuitive to me that we would not want to expand access to a market that imported $6.7 billion in U.S. goods last year, which was up 23 percent from 2006. Severing trade ties between our countries will directly result in Connecticut residents losing their jobs. How does that help us?

Other countries are aggressively pursuing free trade agreements with Colombia. We have a chance to be a preferred trading partner because of our relative nearness, but rejecting this agreement will allow Europe and China to move ahead of us. This shouldn’t be allowed to happen.

Trade Promotion Authority

I support renewing trade promotion authority, which is why I am a cosponsor of H.R. 1042, the Trade Promotion Authority Extension and Enhancement Act. H.R. 1042 will renew the Trade Promotion Authority (TPA) for five years. I believe TPA has been tremendously successful in advancing free trade and has had a positive affect in the United States and globally. I voted for the Trade Act in 2002, which restored trade promotion authority to the President.

TPA gives the President authority to negotiate and bring back trade agreements to Congress designed to eliminate trade barriers relating to services, agriculture, intellectual property, and other areas. It also preserves U.S. sovereignty while enabling new trade agreements to spur economic growth, improve efficiency and innovation, create better, high-paying jobs for hard-working Americans, and increase the availability of attractively priced products in U.S. markets.

In addition to these economic benefits, as income in developing nations increases, the capacity and willingness of these societies to sacrifice consumption for social reforms and environmental protection also tends to increase. Such reforms are more likely to occur in an economy with growing income, a point underscored by the exemption of China and other developing nations from the Kyoto Protocol on global warming.

China

I am increasingly concerned about China's trade policies. While I am an advocate of free trade, I don't support trade when one country is limiting access to its markets. It seems to me China is failing to implement necessary -- and required -- reforms, while the United States has opened its markets.

On July 27, 2005, I voted for H.R. 3283, the United States Trade Rights Enforcement Act, which passed the House by a vote of 255 to 168. This legislation will apply countervailing duty law to certain goods from non-market economies, such as China, and allow businesses who have been adversely affected by subsidies granted to competitors by these countries to bring complaints to a dispute resolution panel. It also expresses the sense of Congress that duties should be applied to all products from non-market economies.

The legislation would also increase trade rights enforcement funding in the U.S. Trade Representative (USTR) Office by $6 million and authorizes USTR to create a trade enforcement officer within USTR who would focus on combating unfair and illegal trading practices by our trading partners.

Furthermore, I was pleased China took a first step towards revaluing its currency. On July 21, 2005, China announced it was revaluing its currency higher against the dollar and said it would move to a system in which its currency's value would be pegged to a "market basket" of currencies, instead of just the dollar.

While I recognize this is only a first step, after years of inaction in moving its currency, this is welcome news. As China revalues its currency, it should close our trade deficit and allow U.S. exporters greater access to Chinese markets. I also agree with many top economists, including Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan, that China's carefully managed move to a more flexible valuation is good for world financial markets.

According to the USTR's 2004 Report to Congress on China's WTO Compliance, China has made substantial progress in opening its markets, but there are several areas - particularly in Intellectual Property Rights - where the Chinese are still lagging behind. Since many of China's reforms were put into place in 2004, I will be very interested to learn about our access to Chinese markets in the forthcoming 2005 report.

I will continue to closely monitor China's progress in complying with its WTO commitments.

On May 25, 2001, the House voted to extend Permanent Normal Trade Relations (PNTR) to China by a vote of 237 to 197. I supported this measure and worked actively to ensure passage of permanent NTR in the House, which Congress must grant before China could enter the World Trade Organization (WTO).

Had we denied NTR to China, we would only have played into the hands of the hard-line Chinese leaders who believe human rights are secondary to the supreme power of the government. Fostering trade, however, helps those in China who support political reform.

A nation cannot have a prosperous free market economy without educating its citizens. The more educated a country's citizens become, the more they will demand an open society and freedom. Only through trade and economic and social engagement will this transformation take place.