Hatch Calls for the Senate to Begin Debate on American Trade Policy

In a speech, Utah Senator Says, “Today’s vote will decide only whether we will begin a debate on trade policy. It will not, in any way, decide the outcome of that debate. Indeed, the question for today is not how this debate will proceed, but whether it will proceed at all.”

WASHINGTON – In a speech on the Senate floor today, Finance Committee Chairman Orrin Hatch (R-Utah) called for the Senate to vote to begin debate on trade policy, including bipartisan Trade Promotion Authority (TPA) legislation that would reaffirm Congress’s role in international trade negotiations.

“If Senators are concerned about the substance of the legislation we’re debating, the best way to address them is to come to the floor, offer some amendments, and take some votes. That’s how the Senate is supposed to operate. I know there are some deeply held convictions on all sides of these issues and that not everyone in the Senate agrees with me. That’s all the more reason to let this debate move forward. Let’s talk about our positions. Let’s make all of our voices heard,” Hatch said.

Hatch further discussed a path forward for a number of Finance-passed trade bills, and laid out a plan to push TPA through the Senate.

“If we get cloture on the motion to proceed later today, I plan to combine TPA and TAA into a single package and move them as a substitute amendment to the trade vehicle. In other words, no one should be concerned about a path forward for TPA and TAA. Even though it raises concerns for a number of Republicans, including myself, those two bills will move together,” Hatch continued. “The question ultimately becomes: What about the preferences and customs bills? I have committed in the past to work on getting all four of these bills across the finish line and I’ll reaffirm that commitment here on the floor today.”

The complete speech, as prepared for delivery, is below:

Mr. President, later today, the Senate will vote on whether to begin debate on the future of U.S. trade policy. It is a debate that has been a long time coming. In fact, we haven’t had a real trade policy debate in this chamber since at least 2002, 13 years ago.

It’s a debate we need to have.

Let’s keep in mind that 95 percent of the world’s consumers live outside the U.S. and that, if we want our farmers, ranchers, manufacturers, and entrepreneurs to be able to compete in the world marketplace, we need to be actively working to break down barriers for American exports.

This is how we can grow our economy and create good, high-paying jobs for American workers.

While the chatter in the media and behind the scenes surrounding today’s vote has been nearly deafening, no one should make today’s vote more than it is: It is, once again and quite simply, a vote to begin a debate on these important issues.

Now, I know that some around here are unwilling to even consider having a debate if they can’t dictate the terms in advance. But, that’s not how the Senate works and, thankfully, that’s not the path we’re going to take.

I’ve been around here a long time, so I think I can speak with some authority about how this chamber is, under normal conditions and regular order, supposed to operate. Of course, before this year, it had been a while since this body had worked the way it was supposed to. Hopefully today’s vote can serve as a reminder.

Once again, today’s vote will decide only whether we will begin a debate on trade policy. It will not, in any way, decide the outcome of that debate. Indeed, the question for today is not HOW this debate will proceed, but whether it will proceed at all.

Right now, everyone’s focus seems to be on whether we’ll renew Trade Promotion Authority, or TPA, and that will, of course, be part of the trade debate.

TPA is a vital element of U.S. trade policy. Indeed, it is the best way to ensure that Congress sets the objectives for our trade negotiators and it provides assurances to our trading partners that, if a trade agreement is signed, the U.S. can deliver on the deal.

As you know, Mr. President, the Finance Committee reported a strong, bipartisan TPA bill on April 22. The committee vote was 20 to six in favor of the bill.

That was a historic day. Before that day, the last time the Finance Committee reported a TPA bill was in 1988, nearly three decades ago.

But, that’s not all we did on that day. In addition to our TPA bill, we reported a bill to reauthorize Trade Adjustment Assistance, or TAA, a bill to reauthorize expired trade preference programs, and a customs and trade enforcement bill.

These are all important bills. They all have bipartisan support. I was a principal author of three of these four bills and I don’t intend to see any of them left by the wayside.

Everyone here knows that I’m anxious to get TPA across the finish line.

And, though it pains me a little to say it, TAA is part of that effort. While I oppose TAA, I recognize – and have from the beginning – that the program is important to many of my colleagues on both sides of the aisle and a necessary component to win their support for TPA.

On a number of occasions, including at the Finance Committee markup, I have committed to helping make sure that TPA and TAA move on parallel tracks and I intend to honor that commitment. Toward that end, if we get cloture on the motion to proceed later today, I plan to combine TPA and TAA into a single package and move them as a substitute amendment to the trade vehicle.

In other words, no one should be concerned about a path forward for TPA and TAA. Even though it raises concerns for a number of Republicans, including myself, those two bills will move together.

The question ultimately becomes: What about the preferences and customs bills?

I have committed in the past to work on getting all four of these bills across the finish line and I’ll reaffirm that commitment here on the floor today. I’ll work in good faith with my colleagues on both sides of the aisle and in both the House and Senate to get this done.

Regarding preferences, the House and Senate have introduced very similar bills, and, in the past, these preference programs – programs like the African Growth and Opportunity Act and the Generalized System of Preferences – have enjoyed broad, bipartisan support. My guess is that support will continue and that there’s a path forward on moving that legislation in short order.

Admittedly, the customs bill is a bit more complicated.

However, I am a principle author of most of the provisions in the customs bill. Indeed, many of my own enforcement priorities are in that bill. Put simply, Mr.. President, I have a vested interest in seeing the customs bill become law, and I will do all I can to make sure that happens.

I’ll work with Senator Wyden and the rest of my colleagues to find a path forward on all of these bills. I don’t want any of them to be left behind.

I am quite certain that, if we’re allowed to proceed today, that these bills – not to mention many others – will be offered as amendments. But, in the end, we can’t do any of that – we can’t pass a single one of these bills – if we don’t even begin the trade debate.

If Senators are concerned about the substance of the legislation we’re debating, the best way to address them is to come to the floor, offer some amendments, and take some votes. That’s how the Senate is supposed to operate.

I know there are some deeply held convictions on all sides of these issues and that not everyone in the Senate agrees with me. That’s all the more reason to let this debate move forward.

Let’s talk about our positions.

Let’s make all of our voices heard.

I’m ready and willing to defend my support for free trade and TPA here on the Senate floor. I will happily stand here and make the case for open markets and expanded access for U.S. exporters and refute any arguments made to the contrary. And, I’m quite certain there are a number of my colleagues who would relish the opportunity to tell me why they think I’m wrong.

None of that happens, Mr. President, if people vote today to prevent the debate from even taking place.

We need to keep in mind that we’re talking about bipartisan legislation here. All of these bills are supported by Senators on both sides of the aisle. This isn’t some partisan gambit to force a Republican bill through the Senate. And, of course, let’s not forget that, with TPA, we’re talking about President Obama’s top legislative priority.

This is a debate we need to have, Mr. President. The American people deserve to see us talk about these issues here on the floor instead of hiding behind procedural excuses.

I urge all of my colleagues – regardless of where they stand substantively on these issues – to vote to begin this important and, hopefully, historic debate on U.S. trade policy.

###

Next Article Previous Article