On the recordMay 23, 2001
I rise to send three separate bills to the desk, S. 935, S. 943, and S. 944. The bills I am introducing provide authority to negotiate bilateral free trade agreements with three important trading partners: New Zealand, Australia, and the Republic of Korea. Over the next several months, the Senate will turn its attention to international trade. As we do so, we find ourselves under serious scrutiny. Will we be able to reach consensus? Will we be able to break the impasse? I don't know the answers to these questions. I have been working hard to find common ground on issues like labor and the environment, and on ensuring the strength of our trade laws. I will continue to do so. But we have a long way to go. As we think about these issues, though, there is another, more subtle logjam within the trade agenda. Right now, our vision of the future seems locked in on sweeping, multilateral agreements, Free Trade for the Americas, the launch of a new round of global trade negotiations under the WTO. These are enormous and complicated undertakings. These agreements are also major opportunities for trade liberalization, and we should continue to work hard to get agreements that are good for our workers, farmers, and companies. But it is interesting to listen to the rhetoric. Why can't we advance labor and environment issues in the WTO? Some say developing countries simply would not allow it. Why can't we agree that our fair trade laws are not for sale in FTAA negotiations?
Source
govinfo.gov




