Trade Policy

Mr. Speaker, I thank the distinguished gentleman for those kind remarks and for yielding.

I thank you also not just for your leadership on behalf of the Members here, but I thank you for your leadership on this issue for the people that I represent, the good and fine folks of Northeast Ohio, from Lorain to Akron to Barberton. This is so meaningful and so important, what we are doing here tonight and what we need to do, this Congress, to ensure that they have a better chance in this world.

It is crystal clear, not just from the discussion tonight but from what we see when we go home to our districts and we look across America, that our trade policies are not benefiting America's workers and America's businesses as they should. And there is a lot of angst and anger out there. People are really concerned.

The trade policies don't work for the average folks, but they also don't work, and I have to emphasize this, for American businesses as they should.

Working families in my congressional district in the State of Ohio and our Nation continue to face mounting job losses and a tumultuous economy. We have heard the numbers before, but they bear repeating.

Since 2000, we have lost 3 million manufacturing jobs nationally. And, unfortunately, 200,000 of those jobs have been from my home State of Ohio.

Now, it is clear that Congress needs to act. When things aren't working, we should change direction. And that is why I am so proud of these new Members whom we have had the opportunity to hear from today and the leadership that they are exhibiting to take this Congress and this country into a direction that will work for the American people. We can't stand idly by and watch our jobs go overseas and our families suffer at home and our trade deficits soar.

I want to point out that I, like so many of the others who have spoken before, feel it is very important to say I am not opposed to trade. You know, sometimes when we start having discussions like this, people try to pit you into one category or another. They like to say you are either for trade or you are a protectionist.

Well, this is not a question about protectionism versus trade. This is a question about the rules of trade, and this is a question about what rules we think should be in a new trade model that will allow for trade to be engaged in fully and fairly by this country but require that others play by the same rules.

Trade can benefit American businesses and workers, and it can be a tool to help developing countries that are looking to access our markets. I hold out hope, and I hope it bears out, that I will have the opportunity in this Congress to vote for a trade agreement that lifts up our working families at home and abroad; a trade agreement that protects our environment at home and abroad; and a trade agreement that has strong and enforceable provisions, ensuring that all partners are playing by the same rules.

Now, we have heard some discussion about fast track already this evening. And my colleague Representative Braley and Congressman Michaud, you have identified this as such a critical issue coming up very quickly, set to expire in June. And I can tell you that, on behalf of those I represent in Northeast Ohio, I, for one, will not be supporting its renewal.

Fast track has been a raw deal for many American workers and businesses. Fast track takes away the accountability and oversight that Congress has been given under the Constitution to deal with trade. And, frankly, it has left us in a position with misguided and downright shameful trade policies that we have today.

If we had not had fast track, Congress could have been in a place to play a significant role in shaping the trade agreements while it still might have made a difference. The problem with fast track is, by the time it gets here, all we get to do is say whether we are going to vote "yes" or "no" for what is a bad trade deal.

We need to move in a new direction on trade. It is a moral imperative, and our fight begins with ending fast track. But there are other concerns that we have talked about on the trade horizon, such as the deals with Peru and Colombia and Panama. And these agreements, they have been modeled after the same flawed model that NAFTA gave us. And NAFTA was responsible for 50,000 jobs losses in Ohio. It is no longer hypothetical. We don't have to wonder what is going to happen with NAFTA. NAFTA has been a disaster for the people I represent and for this country.

So while we continue to get these harmful trade agreements forced down our throats, we have failed to address many of the trade problems we face with China and Japan and Korea and others. And while our trade deficits soar to the tune of a record $800 billion, which I have to tell you is not a record we should be happy with, with these nations, our wages in our Nation stagnate and hundreds of thousands of jobs have been displaced.

What is it about these failed trade policies that those who continue to push them don't understand? This is not acceptable, and we cannot allow this race to the bottom to continue.

I thank the gentleman very much for his leadership. I thank you on behalf of those I represent. I will continue to work with you as much as I possibly can to develop a new trade model, one that will work for American workers and businesses.