U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE

WASHINGTON : 

For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office

Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512–1800; DC area (202) 512–1800

Fax: (202) 512–2250 Mail: Stop SSOP, Washington, DC 20402–0001

56–000 PDF 2010

FULL COMMITTEE HEARING ON 

EVALUATING THE IMPACT OF SMALL 

BUSINESS TRADE POLICY ON JOB 

CREATION AND ECONOMIC GROWTH 

HEARING 

BEFORE THE

COMMITTEE ON SMALL BUSINESS 

UNITED STATES 

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

ONE HUNDRED ELEVENTH CONGRESS 

SECOND SESSION 

HEARING HELD 

APRIL 28, 2010 

Small Business Committee Document Number 111-065 

Available via the GPO Website: http://www.access.gpo.gov/congress/house 


Congress.#13
HOUSE COMMITTEE ON SMALL BUSINESS 

NYDIA M. VELA ́ ZQUEZ, New York, Chairwoman 

DENNIS MOORE, Kansas 

HEATH SHULER, North Carolina 

KATHY DAHLKEMPER, Pennsylvania 

KURT SCHRADER, Oregon 

ANN KIRKPATRICK, Arizona 

GLENN NYE, Virginia 

MICHAEL MICHAUD, Maine 

MELISSA BEAN, Illinois 

DAN LIPINSKI, Illinois 

JASON ALTMIRE, Pennsylvania 

YVETTE CLARKE, New York 

BRAD ELLSWORTH, Indiana 

JOE SESTAK, Pennsylvania 

BOBBY BRIGHT, Alabama 

DEBORAH HALVORSON, Illinois 

SAM GRAVES, Missouri, Ranking Member 

ROSCOE G. BARTLETT, Maryland 

W. TODD AKIN, Missouri 

STEVE KING, Iowa 

LYNN A. WESTMORELAND, Georgia 

LOUIE GOHMERT, Texas 

MARY FALLIN, Oklahoma 

VERN BUCHANAN, Florida 

BLAINE LUETKEMEYER, Missouri 

AARON SCHOCK, Illinois 

GLENN THOMPSON, Pennsylvania 

MIKE COFFMAN, Colorado 

MICHAEL DAY, Majority Staff Director 

ADAM MINEHARDT, Deputy Staff Director 

TIM SLATTERY, Chief Counsel 

KAREN HAAS, Minority Staff Director 

(II) 

STANDING SUBCOMMITTEES 

Subcommittee on Contracting and Technology 

GLENN NYE, Virginia, Chairman 

YVETTE CLARKE, New York 

BRAD ELLSWORTH, Indiana 

KURT SCHRADER, Oregon 

DEBORAH HALVORSON, Illinois 

MELISSA BEAN, Illinois 

JOE SESTAK, Pennsylvania 

AARON SCHOCK, Illinois, Ranking 

ROSCOE BARTLETT, Maryland 

W. TODD AKIN, Missouri 

MARY FALLIN, Oklahoma 

GLENN THOMPSON, Pennsylvania 

Subcommittee on Finance and Tax 

KURT SCHRADER, Oregon, Chairman 

DENNIS MOORE, Kansas 

ANN KIRKPATRICK, Arizona 

MELISSA BEAN, Illinois 

JOE SESTAK, Pennsylvania 

DEBORAH HALVORSON, Illinois 

GLENN NYE, Virginia 

MICHAEL MICHAUD, Maine 

VERN BUCHANAN, Florida, Ranking 

STEVE KING, Iowa 

W. TODD AKIN, Missouri 

BLAINE LUETKEMEYER, Missouri 

MIKE COFFMAN, Colorado 

Subcommittee on Investigations and Oversight 

JASON ALTMIRE, Pennsylvania, Chairman 

HEATH SHULER, North Carolina 

BRAD ELLSWORTH, Indiana 

MARY FALLIN, Oklahoma, Ranking 

LOUIE GOHMERT, Texas 

(III) 

Subcommittee on Regulations and Healthcare 

KATHY DAHLKEMPER, Pennsylvania, Chairwoman 

DAN LIPINSKI, Illinois 

MELISSA BEAN, Illinois 

JASON ALTMIRE, Pennsylvania 

JOE SESTAK, Pennsylvania 

BOBBY BRIGHT, Alabama 

LYNN WESTMORELAND, Georgia, Ranking 

STEVE KING, Iowa 

VERN BUCHANAN, Florida 

GLENN THOMPSON, Pennsylvania 

MIKE COFFMAN, Colorado 

Subcommittee on Rural Development, Entrepreneurship and Trade 

HEATH SHULER, North Carolina, Chairman 

MICHAEL MICHAUD, Maine 

BOBBY BRIGHT, Alabama 

KATHY DAHLKEMPER, Pennsylvania 

ANN KIRKPATRICK, Arizona 

YVETTE CLARKE, New York 

BLAINE LUETKEMEYER, Missouri, Ranking 

STEVE KING, Iowa 

AARON SCHOCK, Illinois 

GLENN THOMPSON, Pennsylvania 

(IV) 

C O N T E N T S 

OPENING STATEMENTS 

Page 

Vela ́zquez, Hon. Nydia M. ....................................................................................... 1 

Graves, Hon. Sam .................................................................................................... 2 

WITNESSES 

Johnson, Mr. Roger, President, National Farmers Union .................................... 3 

Hufbauer, Dr. Gary Clyde, Reginald Jones Senior Fellow, The Peterson Institute for International Economics ........................................................................ 5 

Bond, Mr. Phillip J., President & CEO, TechAmerica ......................................... 6 

Greenblatt, Mr. Drew, President, Marlin Steel Wire Products LLC, Baltimore, 

MD. On behalf of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce ........................................... 7 

APPENDIX 

Prepared Statements: 

Vela ́zquez, Hon. Nydia M. ....................................................................................... 20 

Graves, Hon. Sam .................................................................................................... 22 

Johnson, Mr. Roger, President, National Farmers Union .................................... 24 

Hufbauer, Dr. Gary Clyde, Reginald Jones Senior Fellow, The Peterson Institute for International Economics ........................................................................ 31 

Bond, Mr. Phillip J., President & CEO, TechAmerica ......................................... 35 

Greenblatt, Mr. Drew, President, Marlin Steel Wire Products LLC, Baltimore, 

MD. On behalf of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce ........................................... 44 

Statements for the Record: 

Michaud, Hon. Michael ........................................................................................... 55 

CompTIA .................................................................................................................. 56 

CompTIA, Executive Summary: ′′Small and Medium Size Business Export 

Insights and Opportunities.′′ January 2010. ...................................................... 59 

Czinkota, Prof. Michael R., Georgetown University and University of Birmingham: ′′How the Government Can Help Increase U.S. Export 

Performance′′ ........................................................................................................ 68 

Wilkingson, Prof. Timothy J., Montana State University Billings, Billings, 

MT. ........................................................................................................................ 78 

(V) 

(1) 

FULL COMMITTEE HEARING ON 

EVALUATION THE IMPACT OF SMALL 

BUSINESS TRADE POLICY ON JOB 

CREATION AND ECONOMIC GROWTH 

Wednesday, April 28, 2010 

U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, 

COMMITTEE ON SMALL BUSINESS, 

Washington, DC. 

The Committee met, pursuant to call, at 1:00 p.m., in Room 2360 

Rayburn House Office Building, Hon. Nydia Vela ́zquez [chairman 

of the Committee] presiding. 

Present: Representatives Vela ́zquez, Altmire, Bright, Graves and 

Thompson. 

Chairwoman VELA ́ ZQUEZ. Good afternoon. This hearing is now 

called to order. 

In the last year, trade has emerged as the silver lining in an otherwise weak economy. Annual growth in exports has expanded by 

18 percent, boosting the bottom lines of businesses in a wide range 

of industries, including many outside exporting traditional markets. 

As a recent article in The Economist reports, even architectural 

firms, not exactly the vanguard of American trade, are selling more 

of their services abroad. For an economy on the mend, an uptick 

in trade is a welcome bright spot for small firms facing a shortage 

of domestic customers. It is especially appealing. 

With trade on the rise, so are opportunities for small businesses. 

After all, they make up 97 percent of exporting companies and are 

by their very nature innovative and enterprising. But these virtues 

alone do not guarantee success abroad. Rather, it takes time to 

identify foreign markets, capital to target new customers, and 

training to learn the ins and outs of the exporting process. Some 

of these resources, however, are in short supply, particularly for 

small firms impacted by the recession. 

In today’s hearing, we are going to examine the challenges facing 

small business exporters and look for ways to ensure U.S. trade 

policies are doing all it can to support those firms. When armed 

with the proper tools, small businesses can create anywhere from 

60 to 80 percent of new jobs. It is critical that those resources be 

available today, especially with the unemployment rate at 9.7 percent. But unfortunately, job creation has become an increasingly 

heavy lift for small firms. Small exporters are no exception. These 

businesses face significant roadblocks in reaching new markets. 

Some of those, like the challenge of identifying foreign buyers, have 

2 

been around forever. Others, such as difficulty accessing capital 

and increased red tape due to heightened security issues, have increased in recent years. We need to be sure small businesses are 

able to overcome these obstacles, because when a small company 

has the elements it needs to access customers abroad, it has the 

ability to create jobs here at home. 

Equally important is the basic understanding of the exporting 

process. Unlike the larger competitors, small businesses tend not 

to have massive marketing departments or business development 

teams. So when it comes to navigating foreign economies and 

reaching new customers, they are often on their own. Countless 

other businesses are unaware that exporting is an option at all. 

That is unfortunate because trade is not industry specific. For 

small firms in sectors ranging from IT to textile manufacturing, exporting opens the door to a diverse new customer base. 

At a time of sluggish consumer spending, it is important that all 

small businesses, regardless of industry, have the chance to leverage trade opportunities. 

As Americans, we often worry about shipping jobs overseas. Well, 

one of the best ways to keep that from happening is by sending our 

industry, the goods and services that we create, as a nation overseas instead. Already trade supports one in five manufacturing jobs 

and studies have shown firms that focus on exporting increase employment levels faster than those that do not. Now more than ever, 

our country needs policies that encourage trade and promote 

growth.By improving resources for small business exporters, we 

can achieve both those things and take another promising step 

down the road to recovery. 

I would like to take this opportunity to thank all the witnesses 

for taking time out of your busy schedule to be with us today and 

I look forward to hearing from you. 

With that, I will now yield to Ranking Member Graves for his 

opening statement. 

Mr. GRAVES. Thank you, Madam Chair, and thank you for holding his hearing on trade policy and its effect on small business exports. 

Small business has played an important role in our economy. Not 

only do they create the majority of new jobs in this country, but 

they also drive American innovation that’s critical to meeting the 

challenges of any given industry. 

As our nation continues its quest for a full economic recovery, the 

success of our small businesses is paramount. One way we can help 

clear the path to success for small businesses is by improving trade 

opportunities. Trade is critical to America’s prosperity and our 

trade industry supports roughly 10 million jobs and contributes 

12.7 percent to the U.S. Gross Domestic Product. 

In 2008 alone, the U.S. exported $1.8 trillion worth of goods. Unfortunately, small businesses only represent 30 percent of the total 

value of goods exported from the United States. Additionally, small 

businesses that do export goods are typically only able to sell to one 

foreign market. With 95 percent of the world’s consumers living 

outside the United States, it is clear that expanding trade opportunities for small businesses could dramatically fuel development and 

increase revenue. 

3 

Currently, tree trade agreements with Panama, Colombia, and 

South Korea are awaiting congressional action. Creating more market access for small businesses, through the passage of these trade 

agreements, is one of the best things Congress could do to help 

small businesses and improve the American economy. 

The passage of the Colombia Free Trade Agreement, for example, 

would eliminate duties on 80 percent of the U.S. exports of consumer and industrial products almost immediately. Passage of the 

Panama Free Trade Agreement would increase U.S. agriculture exports by more than a $195 million a year and eliminate all tariffs 

on U.S. ag. exports. The passage of the free trade agreement with 

South Korea would open up access to our seventh largest trading 

partner in the world and dramatically reduce tariffs. 

The benefits of opening market access are obvious and plentiful, 

but failure to expand trade opportunities in the near future could 

prove detrimental to our economy. The European Union and countries like Canada are eager to enter into free trade agreements and 

displace our market presence. The time is right now to get this 

done, I think, and I think it’s very, very important. 

Again, thank you, Madam Chair, for having the hearing and I 

appreciate all the witnesses being here and taking time out of your 

busy schedule. 

Chairwoman VELA ́ ZQUEZ. Thank you. It’s my pleasure to welcome 

Mr. Roger Johnson. He’s the President of the National Farmers 

Union. He was elected president in 2009 and has previously served 

as the North Dakota Agriculture Commissioner. With 250,000 

members, the Farmers Union addresses economic well-being and 

quality of life for family farmers and ranchers. 

Welcome, Mr. Johnson, you will have five minutes, to make your 

statement. 

STATEMENT OF ROGER JOHNSON 

Mr. JOHNSON. Madam Chair, Ranking Members and Members of 

the Committee, as you indicated, my name is Roger Johnson. I’m 

President of the National Farmers Union and I’m also a farmer in 

North Dakota. 

Trade policy isn’t like flipping a coin with only two possible outcomes, heads or tails. It’s more like rolling a six-sided dice in dealing with lots of issues, domestic producers, imports, exports, the 

WTO, jobs, markets, et cetera. 

Many of the small and medium-sized farmers in the U.S. depend 

on foreign markets for a portion of their income. Exports are very 

important to agriculture. Seventy-two percent of our cotton is exported; 63 percent of all almonds, for example; 40 percent of our 

food grains, and the list goes on. 

Increasing domestic market share can help insulate U.S. producers from the vagaries of foreign market which sometimes can be 

rather fickle. Another solution can be found in facilitating access 

to those foreign markets. 

Two programs in particular at USDA I’d like to visit about. The 

MAP program, Market Access Program, and the Foreign Market 

Development Program, or FMD, both of these programs are very 

important. They provide matching funds. They help us with opening markets, help in particular shipping a lot of specialty crops, 

4 

fruits, vegetables, nuts, et cetera. The MAP program is used in 

many different ways. 

In my capacity as the Commissioner of Agriculture in North Dakota, I participated in one of the SRTGs. My testimony goes into 

some detail about this. The SRTGs have helped thousands of small 

businesses enter export markets in cooperation with USDA. Export 

readiness training is made available: international trade shows, direct financial support for advertising trade missions, labeling, promotion in foreign markets. Unfortunately, many producers are unaware of these programs. 

The Foreign Ag. Service also supports small businesses by organizing and hosting trade shows. And the identity for the U.S. is enhanced significantly through these U.S. pavilions at FAS-endorsed 

international trade shows. 

In 2008, only about $30 million of the $200 million budget for 

MAP was spent on small businesses. We would argue that a larger 

percent of that total should be spent on small businesses. We need 

to do even more to ensure available federal dollars are being maximized to help small producers and companies. 

We need to set aside a majority of the money for these kinds of 

producers. If the Federal Government does not recognize the importance of diversity of agricultural production scales, et cetera, we 

will be making a mistake. We must ensure that they are not inadvertently encouraging further concentration in agriculture through 

trade and export policies that might otherwise ignore the small 

producers and focus more on the very large companies. 

Past trade policies sometimes have failed to live up to their proponent’s promises and have placed sometimes an undue burden on 

America’s family farmers and ranchers. U.S. trade deficit today is 

over $400 billion. Current trade policies are often not adequate in 

addressing issues like currency manipulation, environmental 

standards, labor standards, food safety issues, and others. 

There are two pieces of very important legislation I would draw 

your attention to on page five of my testimony. HR 4645, sponsored 

by Chairman Peterson, would open up additional business opportunities to Cuba and also the Trade Act, which would largely help enforce existing trade agreements and help to bring some sense of coherence to the various foreign policies that we have in the country. 

National Farmers Union is a member of the International Federation of Ag. Producers. Some one hundred countries are members 

of the this. We believe, as does IFAP, that every nation has the 

right to food security and should be allowed the ability to provide 

it for themselves with domestic production and with reliable trading partners. We need to do a better job of aligning our humanitarian and economic development policies with our trade policies so 

they do not work at cross purposes. 

On page six of my testimony, I spend some time talking about 

jobs. And let me just conclude by saying that we need a more coherent trade agenda to develop, maintain, and advance jobs in this 

country. Our export markets and trading partners, even if they 

seem very stable, are often unreliable. The markets tend to be fickle. We sometimes lose them quickly through bogus science or food 

safety issues that simply are not true. And so we need to do what 

5 

we can to try and focus on these issues. I provide a number of examples with respect to that. 

Finally, let me say that real growth in U.S. exports will come 

with the economic growth in other countries as they achieve the 

ability to pay for better diets. In many cases, that means allowing 

other countries to support their farmers and protect their markets 

from world dumping. 

Thank you. 

[The statement of Roger Johnson is included in the appendix.] 

Chairwoman VELA ́ ZQUEZ. Thank you, Mr. Johnson. Our next witness is Dr. Gary Clyde Hufbauer. He is Reginald Jones Senior Fellow with the Peterson Institute for International Economics. 

Dr. Hufbauer has written extensively on international trade, investment, and tax issues. The Peterson Institute is a research institution devoted to the study of international economic policy. 

Welcome. 

STATEMENT OF MR. GARY CLYDE HUFBAUER 

Mr. HUFBAUER. Thank you very much, Chairwoman Vela ́zquez 

and Ranking Member Graves. 

As you well know President Obama has committed his Administration to the goal of doubling U.S. exports in five years. Towards 

that end, among other things, he has promised an additional $2 billion of lending authority to the Export-Import Bank, and the Commerce Department has embarked on an outreach program. These 

are useful steps, but they are small steps. My remarks today concentrate on the very special problems facing small business exporters. 

As you know the fixed cost for a firm to engage seriously in exporting goods and services are formidable. And the very high fixed 

costs go a long way to explaining why an exceptional share of U.S. 

merchandise exports are shipped by large firms. 

Professor Brad Jensen of Georgetown University has assembled 

statistics on this aspect and in the year 2000, the top 1 percent of 

U.S. exporting firms--which is about 1,600 firms, less than 1/10th 

of 1 percent of all U.S. firms--accounted for 80 percent of U.S. merchandise exports. And there’s absolutely no reason to think this 

picture has changed much in the last decade. 

Small business firms are conspicuously under represented in the 

U.S. export picture, largely because of the fixed cost obstacles I 

have mentioned. Bearing these obstacles in mind, let me offer three 

suggestions that are targeted at small business. 

My first suggestion is that the Congress should require the Administration to provide a quantitative annual report of past performance and future expectations of small business exports. Among 

the features of this report, it should specifically identify the expected contribution of each of the Administration’s promotion measures. 

My second suggestion is to boost very substantially the availability of export finance to small business firms. This cannot be 

done by the Export-Import Bank, both because the Export-Import 

Bank financing is limited by an array of congressional mandates 

which are quite complicated, and because the lending process itself 

6 

is very complex. A better approach is to create significant tax incentives for private banks to support the export financing needs of 

small business firms both on a pre-shipment basis and once goods 

and services are sold. Towards that end, I suggest--and I go into 

this in my testimony--that private banks be allowed to establish 

very large loan loss reserves for new export-related loans extended 

to small business firms. 

My third suggestion is to bolster the information and technical 

assistance programs offered to small business exporters by the 

Small Business Administration and the Department of Commerce. 

I concur with what was said about the Agricultural Department as 

well. In 2008, I was a guest of the Hong Kong Government and saw 

quite a few things there, but of particular note was an agency devoted to library resources for small business firms in Hong Kong. 

These are big exporters from that small city-state. The library was 

backed up by technical experts. The set up is very impressive and 

I do not know that the U.S. Government matches that level of expertise and an evaluation would be useful. 

The SBA and the Commerce Department are staffed by knowledgeable people, but I would suggest an external evaluation by a 

firm like McKinsey or Monitor, there are many others, as to improvements which might be done. 

And I would finally comment that small business export cannot 

be doubled on the back of a public relations campaign. 

Thank you. 

[The statement of Clyde Hufbauer is included in the appendix.] 

Chairwoman VELA ́ ZQUEZ. Thank you, Mr. Hufbauer. 

Our next witness is Mr. Phillip Bond. He’s the President and 

CEO of TechAmerica. Mr. Bond has held his role since 2006 and 

previously served as an Undersecretary in the Department of Commerce. TechAmerica represents nearly 1,500 technology member 

companies of all sizes. Thank you for being here. 

STATEMENT OF PHILLIP BOND 

Mr. BOND. Thank you, Chairwoman Vela ́zquez and Ranking 

Member Graves. 

It’s a privilege to appear before you. As was noted by the Chair, 

TechAmerica represents some 1500 companies across the entire 

scope of the technology industry. That industry relies on trade for 

investment, for innovation, for growth, for job creation. 

About 17 percent of U.S. exports are high tech exports. And of 

those high tech exporters, 94 percent are small business, but 1 out 

of 4 total small business exporters in the country, 1 out of 4 of 

them are high tech small businesses. 

A couple of examples, if I can real quickly, that illustrate this. 

Authentech is a small, American high tech company in Florida. In 

2008—they do sophisticated biometric sensor chips. They grew by 

about 13 percent in 2008 which was 15 jobs for that company. 

Their primary customers, Samsung, Toshiba, Lenovo, Fujitsu, 97 

percent of their sales go overseas. 

7 

Another example, out of Illinois, PCTel is a small high tech company, very active exporter. It designs products and solutions for the 

wireless industry. Forty-five percent of PCTel’s 2008 sales came 

from outside the United States. These examples, I hope illustrate 

why it’s important that the U.S. facilitate business opportunities 

for small business in overseas markets and eliminate impediments. 

So TechAmerica supports an active, open market policy through 

bilateral, regional, and multilateral trade agreements. We believe 

these assist exports in several fundamental ways which my written 

testimony goes into more detail on, but certainly eliminating and 

reducing tariffs, just as important, non-tariff barriers, standards 

and other things that are often used by other countries to close a 

market. Improving intellectual property protection. Those are the 

crown jewels of these small companies. Streamlining trade facilitation and facilitating in this day and age, open Internet access and 

cyber security, because software services is really the fastest growing portion for high tech employment. 

Secondly, we need to look at U.S. policies that could help small 

businesses grow their exports. This would include reforming export 

controls. Small companies, generally, are not equipped to deal with 

the complexities of our export control regimes. We are encouraged 

by the steps being taken by the Administration in this regard. 

As the Chair noted in her opening statement, trade promotion is 

critically important and tough for small businesses. They have 

their hands full finding reliable business partners, navigating local 

laws and cultures, mining up financing, understanding the market. 

And we recognize while there are many programs designed to help 

them, the awareness and understanding of those leaves something 

to be desired. More could be done, better funding provided to try 

to help promote trade from small companies. 

Small business innovation and new firm formulation ensure U.S. 

products and services are meeting at the cutting edge. That is our 

only hope as a country. We don’t want to compete on wage. We 

want to compete in innovation and new products. And so we hope 

that the Chair and the Members of the Committee would take 

some of these thoughts and the details of the written submission 

into consideration. 

Thank you. 

[The statement of Phillip Bond is included in the appendix.] 

Chairwoman VELA ́ ZQUEZ. Thank you, Mr. Bond. 

And last, but not least, Mr. Drew Greenblatt. He is the President 

of Marlin Steel Wire Products located in Baltimore, Maryland. Mr. 

Greenblatt is testifying on behalf of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce which represents the interests of more than three million 

businesses.Welcome. 

STATEMENT OF MR. DREW GREENBLATT 

Mr. GREENBLATT. Thank you, Chairman Vela ́zquez, Ranking 

Member Graves and distinguished Members of the House Small 

Business Committee. 

My name is Drew Greenblatt, and I’m the President of Marlin 

Steel Wire. We’re based in Baltimore, Maryland and I’m testifying 

today on behalf of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce. This is the 

8 

world’s large business federation and it represents more than three 

million businesses all across America, all sectors, all regions. 

Five years ago today, I testified to this Committee in front of Ms. 

Vela ́zquez on the need for simple regulation and tax policies to 

make it easier for small companies like mine to prosper and grow 

jobs. 

Today, I want to speak to you about the need for trade agreements and this will help all companies grow jobs. Marlin Steel 

Wire is a leading manufacturer of custom wire baskets, things like 

this, and wire precision sheet metal fabrication assemblies like 

this. We make all of this in Baltimore City and we cater to clients 

from pharmaceutical, medical, industrial, aerospace, and automotive industries. 

We have a full-time crew of engineers and industry-leading technology, all kinds of fancy robots at our factory at Marlin. We 

produce world-class products and here in Baltimore City, Maryland. We import nothing from China. We import nothing from anybody else. We make it all right here in America. We’ve been exporting for six years. We export now to more than 20 countries. Over 

the years, Marlin Wire has grown its business and we’ve created 

jobs because of these exports. Today, we continue to look for new 

markets and we want to bring our products to customers all over 

the world. 

I’m pleased to be before you today to discuss the opportunity of 

small businesses and we’d like to see more growth in exports so we 

can grow more and we can hire more people. The bottom line is 

trade brings growth and prosperity to our country. 

What’s unique about our company is that we’re able to make a 

highly-customized product very quickly in very short order. This 

has made Marlin Wire stand out. We’ve been able to receive orders 

from countries like Australia, New Zealand, Taiwan, Ireland, 

Singapore, Brazil, Hungary, Poland, Canada, Mexico. Since we’re 

shipping to over 20 countries around the world, we want to only 

do more of that, so we can grow more. America should use this 

strategy to grow its wages and grow its number of people hired, so 

we have less unemployed people. 

Think about it. Ninety-five percent of the world’s consumers are 

not Americans. They’re foreigners. This is really important because 

trade sustains millions of American jobs. More than 50 million 

American workers today are employed by firms that engage in 

international trade. That’s 40 percent of all private workers. One 

in four factory jobs are dependent on exports, just like my company. One in three acres on the average American farm is planted 

for foreign consumption. It’s for hungry customers overseas. 

Now as global demand for our products increase, we’re going to 

have to hire more people which is good for America. We employ 28 

people. Seven of them are due to all this export business. And studies show that it’s not just my company. Companies that export 

typically grow faster. They hire more people and they pay better 

pages. This is a good thing for our country. 

Now as the president of the firm, I truly understand the importance of international trade and its impact on Marlin and small 

business in general. It’s simple. I want to ship to more and more 

9 

countries quick. It will make my company more safe and more stable. 

The problem is, and this is a big problem, we have a complex 

array of foreign barriers that are stopping us from shipping to 

more countries. These barriers are alive and well. And they pose 

a major competitive disadvantage to my company and to my fellow 

companies that want to export. It hurts American industry. It 

hurts American workers. It hurts American agriculture. 

I believe the number one and the U.S. Chamber believes the foremost goal of U.S. trade policy right now should be to tear down 

these barriers so companies like mine can really crank it up and 

start exporting and start hiring again. Free trade agreements have 

to be enacted quickly. 

There’s a number of pending free trade agreements going on 

right now and they would boost exports. It’s an efficient way to 

grow exports if we can get these things past for Colombia, Panama, 

and South Korea. They’re pro-growth. They’re pro-trade. And they 

will create good, American jobs. It will help our allies and it shows 

that we’re not ready to cede global leadership in trade. We 

shouldn’t delay approval of these. This inaction is hurting American jobs. 

The U.S. Chamber did a wonderful report called ‘‘Trade Action 

or Inaction: the Cost to American Workers and Companies’’ and it 

found that the United States would suffer a loss of 380,000 jobs 

and $40 billion in lost sales if we don’t get these trade agreements 

past and fast. 

The problem is our competitors are surging past us and they’re 

signing deals, like EU and Canada have moved ahead with Colombia and Korea. I don’t want to lose any of my seven employees that 

owe their jobs to exports and I know other countries don’t. 

In conclusion, if America stands still, we’re going to fall behind 

because our competitors in Canada and Europe are moving forward. That’s why I urge Congress to support the pending free trade 

agreements and seek a more effective trade policy that opens foreign markets, boosts our exports, and creates jobs here fast. 

In the end, U.S. business is capable of competing and beating our 

foreign competitors. We can beat anybody in the world. We just 

need a level playing field. These trade agreements can provide just 

that opening and that leveling. Once again, I greatly appreciate the 

opportunity to testify today on behalf of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce. 

Thank you very much. 

[The statement of Drew Greenblatt is included in the appendix.] 

Chairwoman VELA ́ ZQUEZ. Thank you, Mr. Greenblatt. I would 

like to address my first question, if I may, to Dr. Hufbauer. 

You highlighted that high fixed costs are one of the reasons that 

more large companies export. How can these costs be reduced to 

help small firms export? 

Mr. HUFBAUER. Thank you, Chairwoman. I only addressed two 

aspects, the export finance aspect and the technical assistance. But 

of course, the costs go much further than that and as Mr. 

Greenblatt and Mr. Bond have emphasized, these trade barriers 

abroad are a big part of the cost. 

10 

Suppose you want to ship as a small exporter to Indonesia. It 

takes quite a bit of learning to figure out how the Customs Service 

operates. It’s sad to say that corruption is part of the problem and 

this takes a bit of learning as well. And if you’re selling something 

that requires after maintenance, that’s a problem too. 

So how much of this can the U.S. Government deal with? Well, 

as Mr. Greenblatt emphasized, trade agreements are an important 

part for dealing with foreign trade barriers and also the trade facilitation aspect which has a lot of dimensions that we don’t have 

time to go into those. But trade agreements can do something. 

At the end of the day, I regret to say small business will be 

handicapped because the fixed costs are just high. But the handicaps can be lowered and the one I focused on or the two I focused 

on were technical assistance, information, a lot of hand holding, 

you could call it that, plus the finance which is terrifically difficult. 

I don’t know if Mr. Bond’s firm is having problems, but I’ve heard 

in this recession that small business firms are really hurting on the 

financing front across the board, but on export finance, the hurt is 

terrific. So those are just come measures where the government 

might do a little bit. 

Chairwoman VELA ́ ZQUEZ. Thank you. Mr. Bond, exporters have 

expanded access to information on new markets and can use that 

information to grow faster. How do companies in exporting industries benefit from this acquired knowledge? 

Mr. BOND. I think this relates to your last question in many 

ways. It’s a scale advantage of large companies. They may be able 

to afford staff to look into all those things, know those things; 

small companies, much, much less so. 

One of our members, in fact, said to take advantage of many of 

the government programs I would have to retain a full-time person 

in Washington. I can’t afford to do that. So the answer is making 

this information available, making it transparent, maybe online or 

through export assistance centers and other—I think Dr. Hufbauer 

called it hand holding, ways to take the information to the small 

companies. I think those are the kinds of things that we’re looking 

for, and welcome some of the things that the Commerce Department and Secretary Lock have talked about in this regard, trying 

to increase some awareness there. 

Chairwoman VELA ́ ZQUEZ. Thank you. Mr. Greenblatt, small exporters increase employment faster and pay higher wages than 

their domestic-oriented counterparts. Why is this so and what can 

we do to encourage domestic-oriented firms to look abroad for opportunities? 

Mr. GREENBLATT. I think that companies that are shipping, exporting things abroad are a little more sophisticated. They’re willing to deal with a country that doesn’t speak English, and they’re 

a little more aggressive and they’re probably more innovative, like 

Mr. Bond was saying, so that they can differentiate themselves 

from a domestic competitor. 

I think the best thing, the quickest way to help small business 

right now is to rip down trade barriers, because what will happen 

is it will make it a level playing field. We can go in there and we 

can fight in Colombia. We can go compete in Panama. And we can 

sell to South Korea. Right now, I sell to Japanese automotive cliVerDate Aug 31 2005 14:27 Jun 25, 2010 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00016 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 G:\CLERKS~1\HEARINGS\TRANSC~1\56000.TXT DARIEN
11 

ents and we do very well in that market, Toyota, Honda, et cetera. 

But we want to sell more to Hyundai and we want to sell more to 

them. 

Chairwoman VELA ́ ZQUEZ. Can you talk to me, I know that you 

have the knowledge know in terms of going into foreign countries 

and learning the processes that it will take in order to navigate 

their system. 

What would you suggest we should do to help facilitate small 

businesses navigating the processes in those foreign countries? 

Mr. GREENBLATT. There’s a number of programs out there right 

now where through the U.S. Commerce Department that are available to help go to trade shows and things of this nature that I 

think are beneficial and positive and we should continue doing and 

I don’t think they hurt. 

But the big thing is ripping down taxes. Right now we have significant disadvantages. There’s barriers where we pay duties when 

we ship to their countries, and they don’t pay duties when they 

ship to our country. This is true in Panama and Colombia, et 

cetera. That’s one quick way you help us. 

Chairwoman VELA ́ ZQUEZ. Okay. Mr. Johnson, according to USDA, the U.S. will have a $22.5 billion trade surplus for agricultural products and that sounds like good news for farmers and 

ranchers and to help them remain profitable in hard economic 

times. 

How can we maintain this surplus and how important are small 

farmers and ranchers to that equation? 

Mr. JOHNSON. I think maintaining it, if you focus on the two programs that I talked about at USDA, one is run through the Foreign 

Ag. Service, the other one through the Agricultural Marketing 

Service. There’s a lot of technical assistance that’s provided there. 

I led trade teams to lots of different countries as the Ag. Commissioner in North Dakota and I will say that far and away, the 

biggest benefit that we got from that was having Foreign Ag. Service people located in those countries who knew the customs, knew 

the people, who knew the marketplace and could help match up 

those characteristics with the companies that we brought along. 

And so we did a lot of that work in advance of going over to try 

and figure out how do you put the right company into the right 

kind of marketplace and then putting those meetings together. If 

you don’t have that, you’re just at sea. And so those kinds of 

things, and I think that’s a lot of what Dr. Hufbauer was talking 

about with technical assistance. That’s really important to small 

companies. 

So I would—unfortunately, a lot of them don’t know about that 

assistance. A lot of them, they’re just busy doing what they’re doing 

and they’re struggling. So if we can get this information in front 

of them. If we can do more of that hand holding along the way, 

more of that marketplace discovery and information and put it in 

front of them, I think that would be very helpful. 

Chairwoman VELA ́ ZQUEZ. Thank you. Dr. Hufbauer, while the 

U.S. trade balance was declining over the past year, the last few 

months reversed course, increasing by 13 percent. As the global 

economy recovers, do you believe that we are now on a path toward 

higher trade deficits? 

12 

Mr. HUFBAUER. Yes. A lot of things have to be done to reverse 

that course, but the Administration has to back up its declared goal 

of doubling exports which I endorse fully, with much stronger policies than have been announced so far. 

Chairwoman VELA ́ ZQUEZ. Okay, thank you. Mr. Graves? 

Mr. GRAVES. Thank you, Madam Chair. And this is a question 

for each of you. 

Do you worry about, when we have free trade agreements sitting 

out there like the Columbian and the Panamanian, South Korea 

and they’re sitting there and nothing is being done, losing that 

market share. I mean for instance and I use agriculture in the example. As we sit doing nothing on that Colombian free trade agreement, we’ve lost about 40 percent of that market share to Argentine. I mean they’re coming in and they’re just scooping it up just 

as fast as they can get their hands on it because they see an opportunity there. 

Now do we lose—what are the chances we’re going to lose that 

market forever? When you have countries that step in and fill that 

void and do it immediately, that’s one of the things I worry about 

and that’s just an agriculture example. There are examples out 

there probably for everything. And I would just like each of you to 

comment. 

Mr. Greenblatt? 

Mr. GREENBLATT. That’s a great point. That’s a big concern. I 

mean right now Panama is embarking on a huge project, the biggest project since the Three River Gorge project out in—Three 

Gorges Dam out in China, to redo the Panama Canal, rework the 

Panama Canal. And there’s a lot of wire baskets you need in Panama over the next couple of years to make that. 

So we want this trade agreement done right away, so we can sell 

wire baskets, sheet metal components to Panama as they go on this 

massive infrastructure binge. We want to be front and center when 

that all happens. And if America doesn’t sign off on these trade 

agreements, we’re going to be late to the party and we’re going to 

miss that opportunity. And what that means is less people in 

America are going to have jobs. It’s silly for us to give that up. 

Mr. GRAVES. Mr. Bond? 

Mr. BOND. Sure. I think that our industry is foursquare, one 

hundred percent behind open markets and free trade. We depend 

upon it. As I said in my testimony, it drives our efficiency. It drives 

our productivity. It drives innovation. So yes, we’re concerned 

about markets. We’re concerned about supply chains because we’re 

also relying on these countries in many cases for supply chains and 

that ultimately adds up to our competitiveness. 

I’m also happy to be here today because in the meantime we 

should also move ahead on trade promotion. 

Mr. GRAVES. Dr. Hufbauer? 

Mr. HUFBAUER. Well, the Obama Administration has many priorities, but trade policy is not amongst them. And the U.S. has basically retired from the trade agenda in the last couple of years, I 

realize there are other priorities. 

Slow progress on trade agreements is like termites in the basement. I just saw some statistics this morning on—and I didn’t 

bring them today. I can send them along, but U.S. agricultural 

13 

sales in Colombia were going down and in a number of agricultural 

products they were way down. Now whether that’s because of the 

trade agreement not being ratified, I can’t say, but the picture is 

not good. 

The Chamber of Commerce has a report on job losses from not 

ratifying pending trade agreements has been cited. The big picture 

ahead is Asia. Asia is, of course, a very rapid growth area of the 

world and Asian countries are negotiating among themselves, and 

reducing barriers. We’re not part of that picture now. 

The goal of doubling exports, amongst other things, means that 

the United States has to get back into the game. 

Mr. GRAVES. Mr. Johnson? 

Mr. JOHNSON. My expertise is more in the area of agriculture 

and food, so maybe if I could address it from that perspective. I 

would say that there’s another element of this that we should pay 

attention to and that is making sure that trade agreements that 

we have are enforced. 

There are a lot of folks in our industry who are really concerned, 

for example, about even the Chinese market right now, given what 

you have with the exchange rates being so far out of whack. They 

basically have a very strong export centered policy which makes 

imports much more expensive and we need to figure out a way to 

bring some sort of balance to even those countries where we do 

have agreements, whether it’s through the WTO or through its series of bilaterals or multilaterals, et cetera. 

The other thing I would say is that as I indicated in my testimony, I think it’s very important for us to have some sort of coherence among all of our foreign policies. We have very well meaning, 

very important foreign policy goals of making sure that hungry 

people are fed, of making sure that very poor countries develop economically, but at the same time, most of these countries begin to 

develop economically by developing their agriculture and so we 

sometimes are working at cross purposes where we want the lowest 

possible price in terms of in their marketplace for the very food 

products that they’re raising and we end up hurting their ability 

to grow economically. 

So I think it’s really important that we get a broader perspective 

and try to get all of our different foreign policy goals sort of in a 

line, if you will. 

Mr. GRAVES. Do you worry about losing those markets? 

Mr. JOHNSON. Sure. We worry about losing markets all over the 

world, for all of the reasons that I mentioned. 

Mr. GRAVES. Chairwoman. 

Chairwoman VELA ́ ZQUEZ. Mr. Altmire. 

Mr. ALTMIRE. Mr. Bond, the technology industry cluster in 

Southwestern Pennsylvania where I’m from is a key economic driver for the region and relies on exports in key fields such as information and environmental technologies as well as advanced manufacturing. I was wondering if you could illustrate how trade promotion programs like clusters can help clusters like this one gain 

better access to international markets. 

Mr. BOND. Sure, Mr. Altmire. Thank you for the question and I 

would just observe real quickly a review shows that in PennsylVerDate Aug 31 2005 14:27 Jun 25, 2010 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00019 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 G:\CLERKS~1\HEARINGS\TRANSC~1\56000.TXT DARIEN
14 

vania there are about 2,750 tech firms who are exporting today; 

2,250 of those are smaller firms. 

So it’s a very vibrant part of the economy there and I think that 

the notion of innovation clusters, both for the development of the 

companies, but also development of awareness of that cluster globally has been a strategy and tactic that has worked so buyers, policymakers in other countries are aware of emerging innovation 

clusters in the U.S., most famous of which of course is Silicon Valley, but they track and are very aware of these other clusters. 

So having visited other countries in official and nonofficial capacities I am abundantly aware that they track this and are aware of 

it, so I think this is probably a very smart tactic for the region. 

Mr. ALTMIRE. Thank you. Dr. Hufbauer, small firms compete in 

a global market where some foreign companies exports are subsidized as you and the Chairwoman were discussing earlier. 

What resources and strategies have you seen other countries utilize to support their export industries that you might recommend 

that we explore in this Congress? 

Mr. HUFBAUER. Thank you. Well, perhaps the biggest steps have 

been taken in the European Union which, of course, has removed 

barriers right across the 27 countries, I sound like a broken record, 

but the fixed costs of exporting are very high and that has been 

observed in the European Union as well. But the reduction of barriers which means that you can send a truck across Europe, it 

doesn’t even stop at the border. This is hugely important to small 

firms. 

We have the same situation, to a very large extent between the 

U.S., Canada, and Mexico, not entirely because we have much 

heavier security controls at our borders than within Europe. But in 

any event, we have made some progress. 

Now beyond that, I go to those examples that I mentioned in 

Asia and I can also mention examples in Chile. Let me just take 

Chile so I don’t sound just Asia, Asia, Asia. When the free trade 

agreement with the United States was ratified with Chile, Chile 

set up a whole network in this country of offices to help their exporting firms get into the markets. 

And if you go to Whole Foods or any other grocery store, you’ll 

find a lot of Chilean goods. In a wine market, Chilean wines are 

now a big thing which they were not 15 years ago. And across a 

lot of manufactured products which probably aren’t so noticed, like 

fabricated brass, coming out of the copper industry, the same thing 

happens. 

So there is a whole network of offices which is very much more 

extensive for a country of Chile’s size than the U.S. network is 

abroad whether you talk Asia, Europe, or whatever, the network 

helps your firm export. 

Now Taiwan does the same. Taiwan is terrific for small business, 

high tech firms, helping them along. So it comes back to that assistance point which we’ve already discussed. Thank you. 

Mr. ALTMIRE. Thank you. Very quickly, Mr. Greenblatt. You 

talked about Panama and the project they have with expanding the 

canal. What are some of the other industries, if you could go into 

a little more detail, that would benefit American industries that 

15 

specific to Panama could look forward to increased access with that 

trade agreement? 

Mr. GREENBLATT. Caterpillar. They make bulldozers. They need 

a lot of bulldozers when you expand the Panama Canal. All kinds 

of trucks and vehicles need to be made. Machinery to help make 

the canal. I mean there’s a company in Iowa called Vermeer. They 

make construction equipment. 

So I think there are many, many companies out there that could 

help make—we made it the first time. We might as well help make 

it the second time. 

Mr. ALTMIRE. And if we don’t do it this time, we’re not in that 

market. Which of our competitors are going to— 

Mr. GREENBLATT. The EU is going to eat our lunch. And why 

give it to them? We should have it. 

Mr. ALTMIRE. Thank you. 

Chairwoman VELA ́ ZQUEZ. Mr. Thompson. 

Mr. THOMPSON. Thank you, Madam Chairwoman, Ranking Member, thanks to the panel for being here and really an important 

topic in terms of trade. A week or so ago I was with the Pennsylvania Secretary of Agriculture who laid out, I thought, in rather 

unique terms the opportunities within trade when he said ‘‘America is a country of 303 million stomachs and the world has 7 billion.’’ That made sense to me. 

My question, first of all, is traditionally we have miscellaneous 

tariff bills, MTBs as it’s referred to around the Hill, are introduced 

in each session of Congress and these bills usually request certain 

imports into the United States to be given duty free or reduced 

duty status. MTBs tend to be really noncontroversial. Everybody 

signs off on them. 

In the 110th Congress, there was no MTB and in the 111th, 

we’ve yet to see for consideration. I recently was told by representatives of the National Association of Manufacturers that the MTB 

is critical on the wish list for things to get done during the remainder of the 111th Congress. 

My question is where would you place this on your membership’s 

collective radar and I’ll open it to anyone that may have an opinion. 

Mr. Greenblatt? 

Mr. GREENBLATT. As a manufacturer, this is a very big topic for 

us and we need to get these things passed. It helps American jobs. 

It helps America grow and thrive. 

Mr. THOMPSON. Thank you. 

Mr. BOND. On behalf of the tech community, we have enjoyed 

past agreements like the Information Technology Agreement and 

others which are designed to do exactly this. They can be beneficial 

for U.S. technology because we still are the envy of the world in 

that regard, but also because our supply chains extend to these different countries and different customs or tariff reductions, as I 

mentioned in my testimony, can then be expressed in a more competitive price buyer small companies exporting back. 

Mr. HUFBAUER. It seems me, in following this, that the MTBs 

unfortunately got caught under the general cloud of earmarks, 

which I think is very unfortunate. I think the MTBs--I don’t know 

all the details—basically reduce the cost of inputs, often to a firm 

16 

which is exporting. I really don’t think they should be bagged together with the other earmark issues. 

Mr. THOMPSON. Thank you. Mr. Johnson? 

Mr. JOHNSON. I’m not aware that it’s an issue in food products. 

It might be. 

Mr. THOMPSON. Thank you. Mr. Bond, following up on the technology, how does engaging the global marketplace spur cutting 

edge innovative ideas? 

Mr. BOND. Sure. That’s where companies can have success initially as they start up a new product. I’m quoting a former Commerce Secretary who after hearing about all these small companies 

were starting in garages, said ‘‘Well, America needs more garages.’’ 

We need more small innovative companies. They often find success in a particular niche. They may make a product like Mr. 

Greenblatt’s overseas because they’re embedded in the production 

process or something. There are numerous ways. But it’s the innovation, the lion’s share of innovation comes from the small companies and they’re finding unique opportunities all around the world. 

So I think it does have to be central to U.S. policy, how are we 

going to help small businesses. They drive innovation which then 

reverberates throughout the entire economy. 

Mr. THOMPSON. Just kind of a follow up, can you elaborate on 

the connection between increased exports and job creation? 

Mr. BOND. Sure. We continue to see growth in software services 

and other very high value add portions of our economy. Those are 

as my testimony tried to point out, disproportionately relying on 

overseas sales and those are—those small companies are where the 

cutting edge innovation is coming from. So I think the two are inextricably linked and that’s why I’m so happy to be appear today. 

Mr. THOMPSON. Thank you. Mr. Johnson, most of my farmers are 

fairly small farmers. Our dairy herds are about 86 head in most 

of Pennsylvania and certainly in my congressional district. 

How significant is the export trade in your opinion to smaller 

farmers? 

Mr. JOHNSON. Well, all of what farmers produce in most cases is 

aggregated and then those commodities are sold. And as has already been said, depending on the commodity, it may be well over 

half. It may be a third of a commodity that finds a home in an export market. 

You mentioned dairy. It’s interesting. In my testimony I talked 

about some of the issues we’ve faced with being frozen out of markets relative to poultry, to pork, to BSE issue with beef is another 

really good example. We’re still out of many countries without any 

real scientific basis for it. 

Just this week, I believe China has put in place barriers to dairy 

products. And if you think of the irony there, it was not that long 

ago when we were all reading on the front page of the papers about 

melamine in infant formula. And it wasn’t in this country that 

folks were doing that kind of thing. So that’s an example of the 

kinds of things that I’ve tried to talk about, making sure that we, 

even after we sign these agreements, we’ve got to go back and 

make sure that we hold their feet to the fire. 

Mr. THOMPSON. Thank you. Thank you, Madam Chairwoman. 

Chairwoman VELA ́ ZQUEZ. Mr. Bright. 

17 

Mr. BRIGHT. Thank you, Madam Chair. Let me thank each one 

of you for being here and for your very valuable, informative testimony, quite frankly. It’s very heartening to see you and hear you 

say the things you’ve said today. 

Mr. Bond, I’m not sure if it was your testimony or Mr. 

Greenblatt, but did I hear, understand you to say that a small 

business that has exports grow at a three times rate of small business that does not exports? Is that correct? Was that one of you? 

The present economic status of our country right now, would that 

deter some of those small businesses from being attracted to the 

export market, in your opinion? 

Mr. GREENBLATT. It’s the opposite. I mean you want to sell, sell, 

sell right now. You want—you’ve got factories that are not running 

at full capacity. You have employees that are working 32 hours a 

week and you want to get them back to 40 hours a week and heck, 

you want to get them on to overtime and then hire more. 

Mr. BRIGHT. I know that would be the goal and that’s what we 

would hope, but do you see whether or not it would have a deterring effect on small business with today’s economic climate out 

there? 

Mr. GREENBLATT. No, because there’s so many more of them over 

there. There’s—as you said, there are 7 billion stomachs over there 

we should be selling to right now and we shouldn’t focus on the 300 

million here. We should try to sell, sell, sell overseas like crazy. 

Mr. BRIGHT. I understand. Mr. Bond, you want to add to that? 

Mr. BOND. Yes, real quickly. I think what it might do, the current economic circumstance might exacerbate the problem of small 

companies taking advantage of some of the government programs 

and assistance that are out there because they’ve had to tighten 

their belt a little bit more to get through the tough times, and I 

noted one of my member’s company said look, I’d have to have a 

full-time person in Washington to understand all that stuff. I can’t 

afford that. Even perhaps a little less so, when times are tight, but 

certainly they are more compelled than ever to look for other markets. 

Mr. BRIGHT. Sure, you need to out of necessity, but having the 

resources to do so is another factor. 

Madam Chairman, thank you very much. That’s all the questions. Once again, let me thank you, gentlemen, for being here. It’s 

very valuable information for us to hear. 

Chairwoman VELA ́ ZQUEZ. Mr. Johnson, I have one more question. 

The National Farmers Union has stated that market access does 

not equal market share. What is the single most important element 

needed to turn to access into revenue? 

Mr. JOHNSON. Perhaps it’s enforcement. Perhaps it’s—you know 

all these issues that I’ve talked about trying to figure out if there 

isn’t a better system for holding other countries accountable. As 

I’ve been sitting here listening to the testimony, knowing that we 

have this enormous trade deficit in the country, but also knowing 

that agriculture historically has had a substantial trade surplus, it 

probably helps to explain why the kinds of issues we face in agriculture are rather than different than the kinds of issues that 

you’ve been hearing from the other three panelists here. 

18 

Perhaps it’s because other countries are looking and saying well, 

you guys already have a surplus. We’re going to try and push that 

back. I think it’s much more complicated than that because food is 

such a basic, fundamental product that everyone absolutely needs. 

It’s not one of those discretionary kinds of things. 

And I think countries all look at food security kind of like we do. 

We want to make sure that we’ve got it. We want to do what we 

can to make sure that when everything else is bad, at least we can 

feed our people. And so I think you have just a whole bunch of different dynamics at play here and as a consequence I would say 

that we have to be very attentive to holding everyone accountable 

in this system. 

Chairwoman VELA ́ ZQUEZ. Mr. Greenblatt? 

Mr. GREENBLATT. Where we have foreign trade agreements, we 

have trade surpluses, so when we cut those deals, we get—we ship 

more to them than they do to us. So these deals really work out 

in our benefit. 

Chairwoman VELA ́ ZQUEZ. Okay, well, Mr. Johnson, it looks like 

he has some concerns about enforcement being part of it. So it’s not 

only to have the trade agreements, it’s just to have in place an effective trade strategy that involves trade agreements, enforcement, 

technical assistance, to help those small firms, because the reality 

is 97 percent of all exporters are small businesses, yet the revenues, the share is much, much, much lower than it should be. 

Mr. Bond, do you have a—yes, go ahead. 

Mr. BOND. I was only going to respond in terms of your earlier 

question. I think that if you had full-blown access which I’m taking 

to include enforcement, then I think the single most important element is going to be the value you’re delivering and that’s where we 

could be very optimistic when it comes to food, when it comes certainly to technology, we’re the envy of the world in those regards. 

So getting that access, getting streamlined, getting compliance, getting those things done which is the policy that we’re talking about, 

then I think Americans can compete with just about anybody. 

Chairwoman VELA ́ ZQUEZ. Let me ask you, Mr. Bond, the fastest 

growing large export market for U.S. tech exports between 2007 

and 2008 was in developing countries, particularly in South and 

Central America. What makes U.S. tech exports so uniquely desirable in developing countries and the same is true today compared 

to 2007, 2008? 

Mr. BOND. I don’t have the latest data in front of me but I don’t 

doubt that that is true. Just listen to Microsoft’s Chief Strategy Officer last night talking about this phenomena a little bit, that because of the applications and technologies that have been developed 

here applying it then to developing countries and low-cost markets 

in new ways is a big growth opportunity because American technology is generally regarded as the best the world has to offer. It’s 

in demand. 

There are companies there setting up who want to build off those 

products, leverage off those products to give them a local flavor or 

taste and add some value. So it makes sense that we grow there 

and we have other more developed countries where they have very 

aggressive trade policies that are designed to perhaps slow the 

competition down a little bit. 

19 

Chairwoman VELA ́ ZQUEZ. So thank you again for being here 

today and providing such insightful information and for the discussion. I ask unanimous consent that Members will have five days to 

submit a statement and supporting materials for the record. Without objection, so ordered. This hearing is now adjourned. 

[Whereupon, at 2:05 p.m., the hearing was concluded.] 

20 


56000.001
21 


56000.002
22 


56000.003
23 


56000.004
24 


56000.005
25 


56000.006
26 


56000.007
27 


56000.008
28 


56000.009
29 


56000.010
30 


56000.011
31 


56000.012
32 


56000.013
33 


56000.014
34 


56000.015
35 


56000.016
36 


56000.017
37 


56000.018
38 


56000.019
39 


56000.020
40 


56000.021
41 


56000.022
42 


56000.023
43 


56000.024
44 


56000.025
45 


56000.026
46 


56000.027
47 


56000.028
48 


56000.029
49 


56000.030
50 


56000.031
51 


56000.032
52 


56000.033
53 


56000.034
54 


56000.035
55 


56000.061
56 


56000.036
57 


56000.037
58 


56000.038
59 


56000.039
60 


56000.040
61 


56000.041
62 


56000.042
63 


56000.043
64 


56000.044
65 


56000.045
66 


56000.046
67 


56000.047
68 


56000.048
69 


56000.049
70 


56000.050
71 


56000.051
72 


56000.052
73 


56000.053
74 


56000.054
75 


56000.055
76 


56000.056
77 


56000.057
78 


56000.058
79 


56000.059
80 


56000.060
81 

Æ