John Spratt: “That is indeed the consequence of this and other legislation, no question about it. Slipping this bill through under…”

“That is indeed the consequence of this and other legislation, no question about it. Slipping this bill through under suspension makes it appear to be uncontroversial or inconsequential. The point I am trying to make is that H.R. 2644 will have a greater impact on the U.S. apparel industry and U.S. apparel workers than NAFTA ever had. Because of rules, long-standing rules known as item 807 and item 807(a), cloth that is cut and made in the United States can be sewn and assembled under clothing in a CBI country. Then when the clothing is reexported to the United States, the duties imposed when it comes back into our country are only imposed on the value added in the CBI country. Because of this concession, which has existed for a long time, the CBI countries now export to the United States more than twice as much apparel as Mexico, whether we measure it by volume in SMEs or by value. In 1996, the CBI countries shipped the U.S. 2.26 billion square meter equivalents of clothing. Mexico shipped us 1.1 billion square meter equivalents. Let me also comment as the ranking member on the Committee on the Budget on the revenue losses, the budgetary impacts of this bill. It results in substantial revenue losses. To get around these revenue losses and the pay-go rules, this bill uses a low-ball estimate from CBO, then it uses a contrived accounting technique. Mr. Speaker, all we have is the choice to vote this bill up or down, and I say we should vote it down.”