Tom Harkin: “If we can protect a song, we can protect a child. That is my bottom line on this. What do they do with child labor? Oh…”

“If we can protect a song, we can protect a child. That is my bottom line on this. What do they do with child labor? Oh, it is back here on page 18, "It's the policy of the United States to reinforce trade agreements process by seeking to establish in the International Labor Organization--the ILO--"a mechanism for the examination of, reporting on"--et cetera, and includes exploitative child labor. It doesn't mean a thing. I know all about the ILO. It is a great organization. It has absolutely zero enforcement powers. If we can protect a song, why can't we protect a child? Why don't we elevate exploitative child labor to the same status as intellectual property rights? Let's make it a separate principal trade negotiating objective of this Government that when we negotiate a trade agreement with a country, yes, we will negotiate on trade in services and on foreign investment and intellectual property. But let's also put child labor right up there as one of the principal negotiating objectives of our Government. I have an amendment drafted to that extent. It mirrors exactly what is done in intellectual property. We make this young girl the equivalent of a song or a computer chip layout design. Anything less than that means that this fast-track legislation ought to be consigned to the trash heap of history.”