On the recordFebruary 18, 2011
Madam Chair, I am sympathetic to this amendment. The United States should live up to its WTO obligations, particularly if we expect other countries to do the same. Paying Brazil about $12 million a month rather than complying with the WTO decision regarding cotton subsidies isn't the best way to resolve this dispute. I acknowledge that. But this settlement is necessary to prevent Brazil from imposing almost $1 billion in retaliation against American goods and services, as it's entitled to do. This retaliation could take many dangerous and costly forms, including high tariffs on our American sales abroad and allowing Brazil to no longer protect American intellectual property rights. Such retaliation would be devastating. It would cost U.S. jobs and harm thousands of innocent workers who have nothing to do with this case. As a result, I must oppose this amendment and urge its defeat. The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Kind). The question was taken; and the Acting Chair announced that the noes appeared to have it.
