Tom Harkin: “Again, you might ask, well, why should they have to look for this? Why should procurement officers have to be concerned…”

“Again, you might ask, well, why should they have to look for this? Why should procurement officers have to be concerned about this? Under 48 CFR 9.406-2, ``Causes for Debarment,'' there is a whole list of things that they should look for that they made. The ``Made in America'' inscription that I have mentioned, violations of the Drug-Free Workplace Act--there is a whole list of things about which they have to be concerned. The fact is, they do not have to be concerned about child labor right now. It is not even a concern of theirs. So we find ourselves in a peculiar position that procurement laws for the Federal Government say that you have to meet certain standards--a drug-free workplace; you have to have a ``Made in America'' inscription if it is made in America; you have to have country of origin--but you do not have to be worried about child labor. I find that rather odd. What this all really arises out of is that in the 1930 Tariff Act, a provision was added that barred the entry into this country of any item made with forced or indentured labor. That has been part of our law since 1930. Well, forced or indentured labor--what does that mean? It has been interpreted to mean prison labor. There are other forms of forced or indentured labor. A year ago I wrote a letter to the Department of the Treasury asking for a clarification of this: Did forced or indentured labor cover forced or indentured child labor?”