this Market Promotion Program has been one that has attracted an awful lot of attention and some controversy over the last several years. Senators have heard the arguments for it and against it, and why it is important for us to continue to support those who are trying to market their commodities and food products in overseas markets, particularly when they are confronted with trade practices that are developed by our competitors, or even those countries in which we are trying to export our products that operate against our interests. Under the rules of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade, we have tried to reduce barriers to trade, make the playing field fair, and have as a principle for our international trade that if we are going to make available our market here in the United States, we are going to insist that other countries do the same. But from time to time, even though this is the general understanding and the general basis for these international agreements, we run into specific problems--structural difficulties, bureaucratic redtape, call it what you will. It is all an effort to prefer one of our competitors over our exporters in these markets, or to keep us out of the markets altogether. These funds have been very helpful, I am told at our hearings with the Foreign Agriculture Service, in breaking down barriers to trade, to overcoming these efforts to keep our suppliers and our exporters out of international markets.
On the recordJuly 22, 1996
Source
govinfo.govEditor's note · Context
Discussing the importance of the Market Promotion Program for U.S. exporters in international markets.
Share
More from Thad Cochran
Feb 8, 2018
I urge the Senate to approve the Further Extension of Continuing Appropriations Act, 2018. This legislation is more than a continuing resolution to sustain government operations at current levels through March 23. It incorporates a 2-year…
Dec 9, 2016
I ask unanimous consent to proceed, but before I begin, I ask unanimous consent that the Senator from California, Mrs. Boxer, be recognized following my remarks. The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
Jun 6, 2017
I understand that the Army's unfunded requirements list includes a $3.1 billion increase in end strength beyond the fiscal year 2017 NDAA mandate.





