John Shaw: “this amendment does not just apply to these trade agreements. The amendment would prevent the use of the funds by State…”

“this amendment does not just apply to these trade agreements. The amendment would prevent the use of the funds by State, Justice, Commerce and related agencies for any negotiations that would have the effect of increasing immigration. The amendment is unnecessary. The U.S. Trade Representative, as we have already heard, has long recognized that trade agreements are not the appropriate forum to negotiate provisions regarding permanent immigration. In addition, the U.S. Trade Representative has confirmed with the Committee on the Judiciary that it will refrain from negotiating any immigration provisions in any trade agreement negotiated since implementation of the Singapore and Chile agreements, including the agreement in the World Trade Organization. This amendment would send a very negative signal to our trading partners about the United States' commitment to seeking liberalization in goods, agricultural services in the Doha Round. At a time when the services sector accounts for 8 out of 10 U.S. jobs and roughly 30 percent of U.S. exports, we have much to gain from these negotiations. Let us not tie the hands of those negotiating for the United States.”