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) 512–2104 Mail: Stop IDCC, Washington, DC 20402–0001

79–458—PDF 2011

S. HRG. 112–726 

U.S.-PANAMA TRADE PROMOTION AGREEMENT 

HEARING 

BEFORE THE

COMMITTEE ON FINANCE 

UNITED STATES SENATE 

ONE HUNDRED TWELFTH CONGRESS 

FIRST SESSION 

MAY 25, 2011 

( 

Printed for the use of the Committee on Finance 

COMMITTEE ON FINANCE 

MAX BAUCUS, Montana, Chairman 

JOHN D. ROCKEFELLER IV, West Virginia 

KENT CONRAD, North Dakota 

JEFF BINGAMAN, New Mexico 

JOHN F. KERRY, Massachusetts 

RON WYDEN, Oregon 

CHARLES E. SCHUMER, New York 

DEBBIE STABENOW, Michigan 

MARIA CANTWELL, Washington 

BILL NELSON, Florida 

ROBERT MENENDEZ, New Jersey 

THOMAS R. CARPER, Delaware 

BENJAMIN L. CARDIN, Maryland 

ORRIN G. HATCH, Utah 

CHUCK GRASSLEY, Iowa 

OLYMPIA J. SNOWE, Maine 

JON KYL, Arizona 

MIKE CRAPO, Idaho 

PAT ROBERTS, Kansas 

MICHAEL B. ENZI, Wyoming 

JOHN CORNYN, Texas 

TOM COBURN, Oklahoma 

JOHN THUNE, South Dakota 

RICHARD BURR, North Carolina 

RUSSELL SULLIVAN, Staff Director 

CHRIS CAMPBELL, Republican Staff Director 

(II) 

C O N T E N T S 

OPENING STATEMENTS 

Page 

Baucus, Hon. Max, a U.S. Senator from Montana, chairman, Committee 

on Finance ............................................................................................................ 1 

Hatch, Hon. Orrin G., a U.S. Senator from Utah ................................................. 3 

ADMINISTRATION WITNESS 

Sapiro, Ambassador Miriam, Deputy U.S. Trade Representative for Europe, 

the Middle East, and the Americas, Executive Office of the President, 

Washington, DC ................................................................................................... 5 

PUBLIC WITNESSES 

Speer, Jason, vice president, Quality Float Works, Inc., Schaumburg, IL ......... 6 

Niemeyer, Garry, first vice president, National Corn Growers Association, 

Auburn, IL ............................................................................................................ 8 

ALPHABETICAL LISTING AND APPENDIX MATERIAL 

Baucus, Hon. Max: 

Opening statement ........................................................................................... 1 

Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 21 

Hatch, Hon. Orrin G.: 

Opening statement ........................................................................................... 3 

Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 23 

Niemeyer, Garry: 

Testimony .......................................................................................................... 8 

Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 25 

Sapiro, Ambassador Miriam: 

Testimony .......................................................................................................... 5 

Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 31 

Speer, Jason: 

Testimony .......................................................................................................... 6 

Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 36 

COMMUNICATIONS

American Association of Port Authorities (AAPA) ................................................ 43 

U.S. Chamber of Commerce and the Association of American Chambers of 

Commerce in Latin America ............................................................................... 45 

(III) 

(1) 

U.S.-PANAMA 

TRADE PROMOTION AGREEMENT 

WEDNESDAY, MAY 25, 2011 

U.S. SENATE, 

COMMITTEE ON FINANCE, 

Washington, DC. 

The hearing was convened, pursuant to notice, at 10:11 a.m., in 

room SD–215, Dirksen Senate Office Building, Hon. Max Baucus, 

(chairman of the committee) presiding. 

Present: Senators Stabenow, Menendez, Hatch, and Grassley. 

Also present: Democratic Staff: Russ Sullivan, Staff Director; 

Amber Cottle, Chief International Trade Counsel; Gabriel Adler, 

International Trade and Economic Advisor; Michael Smart, International Trade Counsel; and Casey Chumrau, Associate, Trade. Republican Staff: Everett Eissenstat, Chief International Trade Counsel; David Johanson, International Trade Counsel; Gregory Kalbaugh, International Trade Counsel; and Ryika Hooshangi, 

Detailee, Trade. 

OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. MAX BAUCUS, A U.S. SENATOR 

FROM MONTANA, CHAIRMAN, COMMITTEE ON FINANCE 

The CHAIRMAN. The hearing will come to order. 

In 1987, Ronald Reagan said, ‘‘We can look forward to the day 

when the free flow of trade from the southern reaches of Tierra del 

Fuego to the northern outposts of the Arctic Circle unites the people of the western hemisphere in a bond of mutually beneficial exchange.’’ 

Today, as we consider the U.S.-Panama Free Trade Agreement, 

we are on the cusp of realizing this vision. Once Congress approves 

the free trade agreements with Panama and Colombia, it will be 

possible to travel from Tierra del Fuego at the southernmost tip of 

South America up to the Arctic Circle entirely through nations that 

have FTAs with the United States. 

This route will take a traveler from Chile, to Peru, to Colombia, 

and on to Panama. From there the traveler can choose several 

routes through Central America and continue through Mexico and 

across the United States and Canada. This linkage, which has been 

2 decades in the making, is a remarkable achievement. 

The economic implications of this linkage will be comparable to 

the opening of the Panama Canal. The United States and our FTA 

partners account for two-thirds of the western hemisphere’s population and more than 85 percent of its GDP, and over 85 percent 

of our trade within the hemisphere is with our FTA partners. 

2 

Once the FTA is implemented, Panama’s dynamic economy will 

provide lucrative new opportunities for American farmers, ranchers, and businesses. The trade agreement will level the playing 

field for American exporters. Under our trade preference programs, 

Panama has traditionally exported nearly all of its goods to the 

United States duty-free. The FTA will give American exporters the 

same duty-free access to Panama. 

The agreement will, for example, immediately eliminate all duties on more than half of our agricultural exports to Panama. That 

includes high-quality American beef in my home State of Montana, 

as well as poultry, soybeans, and other foods. 

The FTA will also provide new opportunities for U.S. construction firms. Panama is pursuing massive infrastructure projects, including a $5-billion expansion of the Panama Canal. Panama is 

launching energy and transportation projects, including a new subway system, with another $5 billion. 

The implementation of the Panama FTA will help American 

firms tap into these exciting and profitable economic opportunities. 

The FTA also includes groundbreaking comprehensive labor provisions that we negotiated with both Democrats and Republicans in 

May 2007. These provisions require both parties to protect core 

international labor rights, including the right to organize and bargain collectively. Those labor rights will be fully enforceable, just 

like the FTA’s commercial provisions, and Panama has made farreaching changes to its labor code to comply with the FTA’s labor 

provisions. 

Panama has also signed a Tax Information and Exchange Agreement with the United States which will help us combat money 

laundering and offshore tax evasion. This is very important. Concerns about these issues have long stalled the FTA, so it is great 

news that Panama has not only completed and signed a tax agreement, but ratified and implemented it as well. 

Panama has done its part. Now we must do our part. We must 

approve the U.S.-Panama Free Trade Agreement. As we move forward with the agreement, we must be mindful of the bipartisan cooperation that has made it possible to expand free trade from Tierra del Fuego to the Arctic Circle. Trade Adjustment Assistance has 

also been a cornerstone of that cooperation. Trade Adjustment Assistance retrains American workers who have lost jobs due to trade 

because imports have increased or factories have moved overseas. 

TAA helps workers take advantage of the new opportunities that 

trade creates. 

That is why a long-term reauthorization of a robust TAA program must move in tandem with our pending trade agreements 

with Panama, Colombia, and Korea. I do not know the sequence of 

those FTAs combined with the Trade Adjustment Assistance. I do 

not know what is going to come before the other. I do not know 

which house moves before the other. 

But I do know that they must move together as a package, an 

agreed-upon agreement, that both TAA and the FTAs will pass in 

this Congress, otherwise, nothing passes. It is all or nothing. I 

would just send that word out to make it clear to everybody in the 

business community, in the labor community, and others who are 

3 

concerned, that we are doing all these together, the FTAs and TAA, 

or we are not doing any of them at all. They all have to pass. 

So let us realize the vision of free trade connecting the people of 

the western hemisphere from Tierra del Fuego to the Arctic Circle, 

let us approve the U.S.-Panama FTA, let us reauthorize TAA, and 

let us move forward, united in a spirit of bipartisan cooperation. 

[The prepared statement of Chairman Baucus appears in the appendix.] 

The CHAIRMAN. Senator Hatch? 

OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. ORRIN G. HATCH, 

A U.S. SENATOR FROM UTAH 

Senator HATCH. Well, thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Sitting at the crossroads of the Americas, Panama has long 

played an important role in linking economies around the globe. As 

early as 1501, explorers recognized that the unique geography of 

the isthmus could serve as a vital link between the new world and 

the old. 

Panama soon grew and prospered into a thriving marketplace 

through trade. Dreams of a more efficient pathway across the seas 

dominated much of Panama’s history, and that dream was realized 

in 1914 when, under Theodore Roosevelt’s leadership, the United 

States completed construction of the Panama Canal. 

Today, Panama continues to pursue this dream as it engages in 

an ambitious construction project to broaden and deepen the canal. 

This work will help ensure that Panama continues to play its 

unique role as an international trade hub for all of the world’s 

goods. 

But of course Panama is much more than the Panama Canal. 

Today, Panama is a thriving democracy with one of the fastestgrowing economies in Latin America. Panama is a land of new opportunities for workers and entrepreneurs around the world. Panama’s commitment to open markets and fiscal transparencies secures its place as one of the financial hubs of the world. 

With the approval of our free trade agreement with Panama, the 

United States now has the opportunity to provide significant new 

access for U.S. workers in this growing economy. Today, 98 percent 

of Panama’s goods enter the United States duty-free. Our trade 

agreement will turn this 1-way street into a 2-way partnership, 

and, once implemented, 87 percent of U.S. goods will enter Panama 

duty-free immediately under the FTA. This is good news for workers in my home State of Utah, where we already export an average 

of $4.4 million per year in goods to Panama, and it is important 

for most other States in the Union as well. 

The agreement locks in other benefits for U.S. workers. Services 

firms will have guaranteed access to Panama’s $20.6-billion services market. American farmers and ranchers will gain new market 

access through tariff reductions and a fair regulatory environment, 

which will enable them to sell more products to Panama’s growing 

consumer class. Small businesses from across the country will benefit from greater Customs transparency and a more open government procurement market. 

Now, I hope our workers will soon have an opportunity to take 

advantage of this agreement. It has been almost 4 years since we 

4 

completed these negotiations. The Obama administration first testified before the Finance Committee in conditional support of this 

agreement almost 2 years ago to this day. However, progress on 

the agreement stalled while the administration attempted to formulate a framework for its trade policy. 

The administration then set forth a number of labor and tax 

transparency conditions for Panama to undertake before they 

would even consider allowing U.S. workers to fairly compete in 

Panama’s markets by sending the agreement to Congress. 

Now that Panama has met these demands, one would think the 

path forward would be assured. Yet the administration continues 

to delay, requiring the Congress to agree to an unrelated spending 

program before they will send the Panama agreement to us for a 

vote. There should be no more delay. 

The only workers who are going to benefit from continued inaction are in Canada and Europe. As the administration sat by, these 

governments moved ahead to craft their own agreements to benefit 

their own workers. If we do not act now, these agreements will enable Canadian and European workers to leave us behind as they 

seize Panama’s markets. 

The lesson is simple: if we do not take advantage of this market, 

others will. This agreement will pass with strong bipartisan support, if only the administration will take action and submit it for 

a vote in Congress. The benefits of this agreement have been on 

hold for much too long. It is time for us to approve this agreement 

to provide our workers with fair access to this growing market and 

to solidify our strategic relationship with a key Latin American 

ally. 

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you, Senator. 

[The prepared statement of Senator Hatch appears in the appendix.] 

The CHAIRMAN. We have three witnesses today. First, Miriam 

Sapiro, Deputy U.S. Trade Representative for Europe, the Middle 

East, and the Americas. Welcome back to the committee, Ambassador Sapiro. We are seeing you quite frequently now. We appreciate your return. 

Next, Jason Speer, vice president of Quality Float Works, a small 

business in Schaumburg, IL. Thank you for coming, Mr. Speer. We 

would like to hear about your company and what you do. 

Finally, Garry Niemeyer, who is first vice president of the National Corn Growers Association. Thank you all for joining us. 

I would also like to give a special welcome to Panama’s ambassador, Mario Jaramillo. Mr. Ambassador, good to see you. Thanks 

very much for attending. We are honored to have you here today. 

Thank you for coming, Mr. Ambassador. 

Let us proceed. Our normal course of business, as I am sure you 

know, is for witnesses to submit their prepared statements which 

will automatically be put in as part of the record, and I ask each 

of you to speak for about 5 minutes. 

I will begin with you, Madam Ambassador. 

5 

STATEMENT OF AMBASSADOR MIRIAM SAPIRO, DEPUTY U.S. 

TRADE REPRESENTATIVE FOR EUROPE, THE MIDDLE EAST, 

AND THE AMERICAS, EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT, WASHINGTON, DC 

Ambassador SAPIRO. Thank you. Good morning, Chairman Baucus, Ranking Member Hatch, members of the committee. It is always a pleasure to be here. Today I am honored to have the opportunity to discuss the U.S.-Panama Trade Promotion Agreement. 

As I testified before this committee earlier, the administration is 

firmly committed to ensuring that our trade agreements advance 

both our economic interests and our core values. At President 

Obama’s direction, we have engaged Congress and other stakeholders to advance these goals and to build bipartisan support for 

each of the pending trade agreements by successfully addressing 

concerns. 

Soon after the administration took office in 2009, we began working intensively with both members of Congress and the government 

of Panama to address issues regarding workers’ rights. Since then, 

Panama has taken several key steps. These include addressing the 

misuse of subcontracting and temporary work contracts, strengthening collective bargaining and the right to strike, preventing employer interference in union activities, and increasing the protection of labor rights in the maritime sector. Recently, Panama 

passed legislation to improve worker rights protections in export 

processing zones at companies less than 2 years old and in the economic development zone of Baru ́. Panama has now also taken important steps to improve tax 

transparency. Last November, Panama signed a Tax Information 

Exchange Agreement, known as a TIEA, with the United States 

which entered into force in April. In addition, Panama has changed 

its domestic laws to comply fully with the transparency obligations 

under the TIEA. 

Panama’s actions have now enabled us to begin the technical discussions necessary to move the agreement forward. Once approved 

by Congress, the agreement will benefit American workers, manufacturers, farmers, and ranchers by providing greater access to one 

of the fastest-growing economies in Latin America. As Ranking 

Member Hatch noted, last year Panama’s economy grew by more 

than 7 percent. In addition, Panama purchased over $6 billion in 

U.S. goods, which represents an increase of 40 percent over 2009. 

Panama’s strategic location also enhances the importance of this 

agreement. Nearly two-thirds of Canal traffic is bound to or from 

U.S. ports, and 10 percent of all U.S. international trade passes 

through the Canal each year. Panama is in the midst of a $5-billion 

expansion of the Canal and has identified almost $10 billion in additional infrastructure projects in coming years. 

Currently, the U.S. market is already open to imports from Panama, with 98 percent entering duty-free under either our normal 

tariff rates or the Caribbean Basin Initiative. By contrast though, 

our exports of consumer and industrial goods and agricultural 

products to Panama face an average tariff of 7 percent and 15 percent respectively. 

The agreement will eliminate immediately over 87 percent of tariffs on U.S. industrial goods, including consumer goods produced in 

6 

States like New York and New Jersey, construction equipment produced in States like Florida and Washington, and machinery produced in States like Michigan and Iowa. The agreement will likewise immediately eliminate more than half of tariffs on agricultural products grown in States like Texas and Kansas. 

Finally, the agreement will provide greater access to Panama’s $20-billion services market. It will improve standards for the protection and the enforcement of intellectual property rights, and it 

will increase Panama’s accountability in areas ranging from Customs administration to government procurement. 

Before I close, I want to emphasize the Obama administration’s 

continuing commitment to moving forward with a comprehensive 

trade agenda that not only reduces trade barriers, but also keeps 

faith with America’s workers. Moving forward with our trade 

agreements now must, as the chairman stated, include a deal on 

the renewal of a robust Trade Adjustment Assistance program that 

will help Americans who need training and other services when 

their jobs are affected by trade. 

We also look forward to working with you to reauthorize the expired trade preference programs and to grant Russia Permanent 

Normal Trade Relations as that country joins the WTO. The Panama agreement is an important element of this administration’s 

comprehensive trade agenda. We stand ready to work with you in 

a manner that builds public and bipartisan support for trade, that 

helps U.S. companies compete and prosper, and sustains greater 

job growth here at home. 

Thank you. 

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you, Madam Ambassador. 

[The prepared statement of Ambassador Sapiro appears in the 

appendix.] 

The CHAIRMAN. Any one of the three of you can answer this 

question: what are the major product opportunities under this FTA 

for American producers? Is it agriculture? Is it corn? Is it products? 

Panama is building this big expansion down there at the Panama 

Canal. What are the major benefits for Americans with this new— 

let me ask Mr. Speer and Mr. Niemeyer first, since your people are 

on the ground. 

Oh, excuse me. You have not given your testimony yet. I am 

sorry. I got so excited listening to Ambassador Sapiro. 

Mr. Speer, why don’t you testify first, then Mr. Niemeyer? I am 

sorry. I don’t know where I have been. You get more than 5 minutes, Mr. Speer. [Laughter.] 

STATEMENT OF JASON SPEER, VICE PRESIDENT, 

QUALITY FLOAT WORKS, INC., SCHAUMBURG, IL 

Mr. SPEER. Good morning, Chairman Baucus, Ranking Member 

Hatch, and other members of the committee. My name is Jason 

Speer. I am the vice president and general manager of Quality 

Float Works, and I am pleased to testify as a member of the board 

of directors of the National Association of Manufacturers. I have a 

prepared statement for the record and some brief remarks at this 

time. 

Quality Float Works is also a proud member of the Latin American Trade Coalition, a broad-based group of 1,200 U.S. companies 

7 

that directly employ more than 10 million American workers, all of 

which have joined together to press for approval of these trade 

agreements. 

Quality Float Works is America’s, if not the world’s, premier 

manufacturer of hollow metal float balls and valves. Our floats, 

which I have an example of here, are used for liquid level controls 

in a wide variety of industries, including gas, oil, plumbing, and agricultural applications. Many products you see and use every day 

would not operate properly without our products. We currently 

have about 23 employees in the United States, and we have a 

branch office in Dubai. 

We are a 96-year-old family-owned and -operated business, and 

I am currently the 4th generation of our company. In 2001, exports 

accounted for 3 percent of our total sales, but, with hard work and 

proactive engagement, now about one-third of our sales are exports. 

This has also led to our doubling our workforce in the same 

amount of time. 

While our domestic sales have felt the effects of the recession, 

our international sales have continued to flourish. Foreign customers have found that it is more cost-effective to purchase our 

high-quality products and ship them overseas than to buy inferior 

products locally that tend to cause problems. In this vein, the benefits of free trade have been fundamental to the growth of our company and our ability to provide quality jobs to our workers here. 

However, tariff and market access barriers in overseas markets 

continue to present challenges to us and American exporters. For 

small businesses to export more, foreign trade barriers must come 

down. That can only happen if we get trade agreements that will 

level the playing field and get rid of those barriers. Thousands of 

companies, including ours, eagerly await the passage of the trade 

promotion agreement with Panama. 

In fact, I actually just flew back from Panama last night, and I 

am happy to report that, after spending a week over there, I had 

a very successful trip, and we have encountered great opportunities. We are anxiously awaiting this free trade agreement to pass 

so we can further pursue that. I am looking forward to flying back 

there shortly. Currently, our product faces between a 3- to 10- 

percent tariff, so, as soon as that is eliminated, it will enable us 

to become much more competitive. 

Such newfound market access would facilitate many first-time 

sales for small and medium-sized companies, those who could not 

afford the stiff tariffs previously attached to their products. We are 

the companies that need the help. The big companies will surely 

benefit, but the small and mid-sized companies tend to gain the 

most from these acts. Panama and the rest of Latin America represent a significant and growing market. Further, the $5-billion expansion of the Panama Canal is moving ahead and presents significant opportunities for U.S. companies. The best stimulus package 

we can receive would be the elimination of the foreign trade barriers through more agreements. 

In my recent visit to Panama I noticed it is a great place for a 

gateway to all of Latin America. They use the U.S. dollar and are 

very pro-business and USA-friendly. With the passage of these 

three pending trade agreements, our company and many thousands 

8 

of small and medium-sized companies like ours will have the opportunity to gain market access share and provide more jobs. 

Removing trade barriers with Panama, as well as South Korea 

and Colombia, will level the playing field for American workers, 

businesses, providers, and farmers. The U.S.-Panamanian relationship goes way back to when we helped build the Canal, but we are 

losing ground as our counterparts in the E.U., Brazil, China, and 

Canada are moving quickly with their own trade agreements. 

I want our company to grow and prosper. I need to keep it going 

for the 5th generation for my kids, and 95 percent of our customers 

are abroad. That is where the growth is. I am asking you to help 

me achieve my goals to continue to have our company’s export 

sales grow. 

In order to achieve the President’s National Export Initiative to 

double exports sales, we need tools like this to help us. American 

manufacturers are running a trade surplus in excess of $20 billion 

a year with our free trade partners. With more agreements, we can 

run that surplus even higher. 

Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. I appreciate the opportunity to testify here. 

The CHAIRMAN. You bet. Thank you, Mr. Speer, very much. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Speer appears in the appendix.] 

The CHAIRMAN. Mr. Niemeyer? 

STATEMENT OF GARRY NIEMEYER, FIRST VICE PRESIDENT, 

NATIONAL CORN GROWERS ASSOCIATION, AUBURN, IL 

Mr. NIEMEYER. Chairman Baucus, Ranking Member Hatch, and 

members of the committee, thank you for this opportunity to testify 

about the U.S.-Panama Trade Promotion Agreement and its importance to agriculture. My name is Garry Niemeyer. I am a farmer 

from Auburn, IL and the first vice president of the National Corn 

Growers Association. 

NCGA was founded in 1957 and represents 35,000 dues-paying 

corn growers. NCGA and its affiliated State associations work together to help protect and advance corn growers’ interests. I appreciate the committee holding this hearing so we can show how developing new markets for our country’s agricultural products will 

help lead the Nation in economic growth and international competitiveness. 

Earlier this month, Agriculture Secretary Vilsack testified before 

the House Agriculture Committee and highlighted the success stories of American agriculture exports. In fiscal year 2011, U.S. agriculture exports are forecast to reach a record high of $135.5 billion. 

This astounding number is a nearly $27-billion increase over fiscal 

year 2010, and a record trade surplus—let me repeat, a surplus— 

of $47.5 billion. 

Pending free trade agreements like the one with Panama will 

help farmers and ranchers continue this record-breaking pace. The 

United States is the largest corn producer and exporter in the 

world. During the 2009–2010 marketing year, the United States 

exported approximately 2 billion bushels of corn worldwide. Corn 

co-products, such as distiller’s dried grains, or DDGs, represent a 

growing market for domestic producers. In marketing year 2010, 

the United States exported over 8 million metric tons of DDGs. In 

9 

2009–2010, Panama imported 14,000 metric tons of DDGs from the 

United States. While relatively small in volume, imports are growing, and there is significant potential for increased use in feed rations. 

Now, to discuss the Panama Trade Promotion Agreement. Panama is one of the fastest-growing economies in Latin America. In 

2010, total U.S. agricultural exports to Panama exceeded $450 million, and the U.S. share of Panama’s agricultural imports stood at 

48 percent. Top U.S. exports were corn, soybean cake and meal, 

wheat, rice, and horticultural products. 

If the United States fails to capture the opportunities presented 

in the Panama TPA, our share of Panama’s agricultural imports 

will plummet. As a producer, it is frustrating to watch other nations achieve preferential access to markets and secure competitive 

edges over U.S. corn and corn products. 

U.S. grain tariffs into Panama can be as high as 90 percent, 

while nearly all Panamanian exports enter the United States dutyfree under the Caribbean Basin Initiative passed in Congress in 

1983. The Panama TPA stands to level the playing field between 

the U.S. and the Panamanian exports. Corn exports to Panama 

peaked in 2008 and have since dropped 20 percent. U.S. corn growers realized some erosion to the market in 2010 due to the lack of 

progress of the Panama TPA. 

The Panama TPA will establish a 298,700-ton duty-free preferential tariff rate quota for corn. The over-quota tariff of 40 percent will be eliminated in 15 years with no reduction in the first 

5 years. This is a certainty. The growers need to ensure robust, reliable export markets. It is important to highlight Panama’s strategic location as a major shipping route. Fifty-seven percent of U.S. 

grain leaving Gulf ports uses the Panama Canal. In 2006, Panama approved a $5.25-billion project to double the 

capacity of the Canal. The expansion is good news for corn farmers; 

however, expanding the Canal does not completely solve our problems. For decades, we have been concerned with the conditions of 

the locks and dams on the Mississippi River. If domestic infrastructure is inadequate, the Canal expansion will be a missed opportunity. 

We respectfully request the members of the committee and others in Congress to support the pending trade agreement with Panama. We appreciate efforts by U.S. trade negotiators to increase 

meaningful and achievable access to foreign markets. Moreover, 

U.S. corn producers stand ready to develop and provide corn products to meet the demands of a modern global consumption. 

Thank you. 

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you, Mr. Niemeyer. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Niemeyer appears in the appendix.] 

The CHAIRMAN. With respect to agricultural products, I would 

like to ask you and/or Ambassador Sapiro the degree to which, if 

at all, Panama tends to block food products on an unscientific 

basis. The big thing we are trying to push, obviously, is to get 

countries to look at goods on a scientific, as opposed to a political, 

basis. I am just asking what your experience is in Panama or 

other, say, Central American or South American countries. 

10 

Mr. NIEMEYER. Well, generally speaking—and this has no reflection upon Panama itself, it is just general trade as you would ask 

the question—the SPS, in other words the sanitary and phytosanitary agreements, are a compromise that permits countries to 

take measures to protect the public health—and we think that is 

important—within their own borders as long as they do not do so 

in a manner that restricts trade or—— 

The CHAIRMAN. What about Panama? Any experience in Panama? 

Mr. NIEMEYER. We have not had that experience with Panama. 

No, sir. 

The CHAIRMAN. All right. 

Let me ask you, Ambassador Sapiro, about the tax treaty. Are 

you satisfied with it? I mean, is it going to enable the United 

States tax enforcement officials, the IRS for example, to determine 

whether or not Americans are taking advantage, or others are taking advantage, of so-called havens in Panama? 

Ambassador SAPIRO. This is a very important agreement that our 

Department of Treasury negotiated. We have Tax Information Exchange Agreements with a number of countries, and they contain 

very important provisions on transparency and on the exchange of 

tax-related information between governments. So I do believe that 

this is an important step forward. 

You may recall, Mr. Chairman, that our government tried to negotiate a TIEA with Panama beginning in 2002, but efforts stalled. 

We were very pleased that we were able to reinvigorate this effort 

and successfully conclude the discussions last fall when we signed 

the TIEA. Panama, as you know, brought that agreement into 

force, as we did, this past April. So we do feel confident going forward that we have a very good basis for dealing with any issues 

that may arise. 

The CHAIRMAN. What about the so-called gray list? What is the 

disposition of that subject? 

Ambassador SAPIRO. Under the OECD rules, a country is on the 

gray list until it signs 12 tax transparency agreements. My understanding is that Panama has negotiated 14 and at this point has 

signed 11, including the TIEA with the United States. Therefore, 

it appears it is very close to being removed from the OECD gray 

list. 

The CHAIRMAN. So you are confident that U.S. tax authorities 

can determine the name and accounts and necessary information 

with respect to Panama under these treaties to try to enforce U.S. 

tax law? 

Ambassador SAPIRO. I am confident, Mr. Chairman. We have a 

strong TIEA, as I mentioned, which is now in force. In addition, 

Panama has already passed legislation to comply fully with the 

transparency obligations of the TIEA. They did that before the 

agreement was even in force. They have also passed a law called 

‘‘Know Thy Client,’’ which deals with the problem of anonymous 

bearer shares. So they have taken important steps in fulfillment of 

the obligations of the TIEA already. 

The CHAIRMAN. I would like any one of you to answer the question, what will the commercial or political consequences of the U.S. 

11 

failing to ratify this FTA be in terms of dollars, in terms of any 

other criteria you may want to use? 

Ambassador SAPIRO. Of failing to ratify the FTA? 

The CHAIRMAN. Yes. 

Ambassador SAPIRO. As you and other members know, this is a 

very important agreement for our exporters. We currently allow 

Panama to export approximately 98 percent of its goods duty-free, 

so this would level the playing field and in our view contribute 

greatly to our exports of goods, exports of services, allow us to take 

advantage of the $20 billion-plus services market, and also enable 

us to take advantage of the infrastructure projects that Panama is 

in the process of preparing for, and in some cases has already 

launched. 

The CHAIRMAN. Mr. Speer and Mr. Niemeyer, do you want to answer that question? 

Mr. SPEER. Sure. Having just come back from Panama, there are 

tremendous opportunities in the market for us and for a number 

of companies and manufacturers in the United States. We are certainly losing ground as our counterparts in the E.U. and Canada 

are pursuing this, and we are losing business without these being 

passed. The tariff that we have certainly adds on to our cost, and 

we lose competitiveness in their market. So the more quickly this 

is passed, the easier it will be for businesses to export and to increase sales and jobs in the United States. 

The CHAIRMAN. So it is not only that you are losing sales, but 

you are also losing competition as other countries are coming in 

and taking advantage. 

Mr. SPEER. Absolutely. Panama has a great relationship with the 

United States, but we are losing ground, and it is unfortunate to 

see that. 

The CHAIRMAN. Mr. Niemeyer? 

Mr. NIEMEYER. In 2010, we did $450-million worth of agricultural exports with Panama, which amounted to 48 percent. We 

hope to increase that. 

The CHAIRMAN. But are you losing market share? I know in Colombia, the United States is losing market share to, say, Canada, 

for grains. I am curious as to what is happening in corn. 

Mr. NIEMEYER. Corn itself was down 20 percent in the last 

2 years, again, for the same reasons my other two presenters here 

have said. It is because we do not have market access and we are 

up against Mercosur, as well as some of the other foreign governments, because we do not have the TPA to accomplish what we 

need to accomplish. 

The CHAIRMAN. Good. Thank you. 

Senator Hatch? 

Senator HATCH. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Ambassador Sapiro, in the view of the administration, is there 

anything else Panama needs to do before you will submit the 

agreement to Congress for its consideration? 

Ambassador SAPIRO. As Ambassador Kirk noted in his letter to 

the committee several weeks ago, we believe that Panama, at that 

time, was ready to start the informal dialogue among staffs in 

order to prepare the legislation that we will submit. So we are very 

12 

pleased with the progress that Panama has accomplished, and we 

do look forward to being able to bring that agreement forward. 

Senator HATCH. All right. 

I believe the Panama agreement will gain broad bipartisan support in the Senate. Your administration has had the opportunity to 

both define your concerns about the agreement and to work to resolve them. Now that you have done that, will you fight to ensure 

that the agreement gets the bipartisan support that it deserves? 

Ambassador SAPIRO. Yes, Senator. We are working hard to ensure that we have broad bipartisan support and are pleased with 

the support that we know we have already secured. 

Senator HATCH. Well, that is refreshing, because to date I have 

seen very little activity from the administration in support of any 

of the three free trade agreements, other than they said they will 

bring them up. Now, these agreements are complex, so it is important for Senators to hear from the administration about the specific 

benefits of the agreement. We will try to get that around too, but 

I think it is important for the administration to do that. We will 

certainly help you in any way that we can as well. 

Let me just ask you this. Would you quantify how many jobs the 

U.S. would have gained had the agreement been implemented in 

the years since it was negotiated? And second, since we have no 

doubt lost market share to our competitors who have signed FTAs 

with Panama while the administration waited, would you give us 

your views how further delay in implementing this agreement will 

impact future market share? So first, how many jobs we lost, then 

what about future market share. 

Ambassador SAPIRO. With respect to market share, looking over 

the past couple years, our market share has remained relatively 

constant overall. It is just under 30 percent. It has declined slightly, but within a couple of percentage points or less. 

Senator HATCH. All right. 

Ambassador SAPIRO. Our nearest competitors, China for example, 

and the E.U., have much less significant market shares. They 

range between 4 and 6 percent. Nonetheless, we are hardly sitting 

back. We worked intensively, as I mentioned, to address the outstanding issues and to be able to bring the agreement forward to 

you. 

What we have done in the last few weeks—and perhaps it has 

been out of the limelight, but I assure you that your staff and our 

staff have been intensively engaged since early May in the process 

of discussing the contents of the implementing bill and the Statement of Administrative Action. 

Senator HATCH. All right. 

Mr. Speer, as you mentioned in your testimony, Quality Float 

Works experienced record growth because of overseas exports. Now, 

I applaud your efforts in achieving this expansion of your company. 

In 2001, your company’s exported goods accounted for only 3 percent of your total sales, and last year’s exports skyrocketed to onethird of your total sales. Can you explain this exponential increase 

in foreign sales? 

Mr. SPEER. Well, we have pursued an aggressive export campaign. We look at different areas where we can compete. The free 

trade agreements factor into that. If there is an area—such as 

13 

Oman or Chile, Singapore, Australia, where we have agreements— 

that is easier for us to sell to without tariffs, it certainly helps. We 

actually just lost a very large contract to South Korea to a German 

company because of an 8-percent tariff that we had to add into our 

cost, so that was a significant blow. Had there been an agreement 

with South Korea, we would have had an advantage there. 

Senator HATCH. I see. 

Now, Mr. Niemeyer, I am increasingly concerned that implementing legislation for the U.S. trade agreements with Panama, 

Colombia, and of course South Korea as well, might not be sent by 

the administration to Congress this year. Now, what would be the 

consequence for U.S. corn growers of not submitting the agreement 

for congressional consideration until the fall, or even perhaps beyond? 

Mr. NIEMEYER. It is just a continuation of the lack of concern 

that we have the opportunity to be able to have good-quality markets that we know will be viable in the future. We have had this 

kind of reduction, like in Colombia. There has been a dramatic decrease from 114 million metric tons to 36 million metric tons over 

about 2 or 3 years, and we are considering all these, plus Panama 

at a 20-percent reduction in the last 2 or 3 years. It is just a continuing slide in the amount of market access that we have in the 

future, and we are concerned about that. 

Senator HATCH. Well, thank you. My time is up, Mr. Chairman. 

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you, Senator. 

Senator Stabenow? 

Senator STABENOW. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Welcome to all of 

our witnesses. 

As a member of the President’s Export Council, I am very committed to expanding our export opportunities, and certainly, as 

chair of the Agriculture Committee, I want to see us doing that for 

our growers and processors. 

My question, though, to Ambassador Sapiro is about, really, the 

issue of how we move forward. I have always said I want to export 

our products, not our jobs. We have situations where people have 

lost jobs as a result of what has happened in a global economy and, 

in many cases, I think, because of unfair trade practices. 

But there are 41 of us who have sent a letter, 41 Senators, reaffirming and supporting the President’s decision to insist that we 

pass Trade Adjustment Assistance first before sending up the trade 

agreements. This could be done very quickly if people want to do 

that. But can you confirm once again today that the agreements 

will not be sent up until we address Trade Adjustment Assistance 

for working men and women in this country who have found themselves at the negative end of the changes in our economy? 

Ambassador SAPIRO. Senator Stabenow, you and other Senators 

sent a very powerful letter to the President explaining precisely 

why a robust renewal of Trade Adjustment Assistance is so vital. 

There are Americans hurting today because they have been denied 

benefits recently as a result of the expiration of the 2009 legislation. We fully want to see TAA restored in a manner that benefits 

those who were included in 2009. 

Ambassador Kirk and all of us have made it very clear that we 

need to have a deal on Trade Adjustment Assistance in order to see 

14 

the three agreements pass. So we feel very strongly, as the chairman said, that TAA must move in tandem with the trade agreements. 

So that very question, the exact sequencing and timing, is being 

discussed now, and I too hope that it will be worked out quickly 

so that we can bring these agreements forward and that we can 

benefit all of our exporters and our American workers who stand 

to gain from the three of them. 

Senator STABENOW. Well, as we indicated in our letter, we would 

strongly urge that that be done first, and then we will be able to 

move forward with the agreements. 

Let me ask Garry Niemeyer. Welcome, Mr. Niemeyer. Speak a 

little bit more about the benefits from the corn growers’ standpoint 

in terms of, when you look at processed food exports—which we understand also would be increased by about 40 percent with passage 

of this agreement—how does that affect the corn growers as well? 

Mr. NIEMEYER. Well, as you well know, especially with Panama, 

there are from 90- to 260-percent tariffs on a lot of products that 

come into the country. By eliminating those over a period of years, 

first for agricultural products, we want to go to 40 percent after the 

first 5 years and then eliminate them over the next 10. All that 

means is more profitability for the United States and fair trade 

throughout the world. 

Senator STABENOW. Thank you. 

Let me, if I might, in just my final minute talk a little bit more 

about the sanitary and phytosanitary issues related to our U.S. exports, which are an ongoing challenge for us in a number of different countries. But I am very pleased to see that the agreement 

will recognize the U.S. meat and poultry inspection system as 

equivalent to Panama’s own, which I think is important. 

When we look forward though on other fronts, while I have you, 

Ambassador, we have a number of other issues with other countries as well, and it is important that the USTR continue to push 

for other countries to recognize the United States’ meat and poultry 

inspection system as equivalent to their own. 

Let me just raise great concerns right now with our pork producers, beef and pork as well, as it relates to declining sales in 

Russia due to these issues. I would like to know if USTR can assure us that the U.S. will not finalize WTO accession negotiations 

with Russia until these issues for our meat producers are addressed as it relates to the SPS issues. 

Ambassador SAPIRO. We are fully engaged, Senator, with Russia 

on these very important issues. As you may know, President 

Obama and President Medvedev personally discussed the problems 

we were having with our chicken exports when they met last summer. Our goal is that issues can be resolved at lower levels wherever possible, but part of our work with Russia with respect to its 

access to the WTO, both on the multilateral front in Geneva and 

bilaterally, deals with the very important and tough question of 

SPS. 

So we are fully aware of the situation right now with the Tariff 

Rate Quotas, and I want to assure you we are working very hard 

to address those and to also address the other issues that we want 

to see in place in order for Russia to enter, and of course for the 

15 

Congress to be able to lift Jackson-Vanik so that our exporters will 

be able to enjoy the full benefits of Russia’s accession, and also so 

that we will have the tools at our disposal, the mechanisms of dispute settlement available to us, because currently we have no remedy. But with Russia in the WTO, we will. 

Senator STABENOW. We also have issues with Vietnam, so I 

would just urge you, as it relates to meat and poultry, we have 

some serious issues that need to be resolved. 

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you, Senator. 

Senator Menendez, you are next. 

Senator MENENDEZ. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Ms. Sapiro, let me ask you: on the labor elements of this agreement, I know that, in the Colombia labor action plan, there was a 

provision for new inspectors to monitor violations against the labor 

code. I know that Panama has recently addressed similar concerns 

over the protection of workers’ rights to collectively bargain and to 

strike. Has the Panamanian government made a provision to increase the number of its inspectors to ensure workers have the 

right, both in established and in new businesses, to ensure their 

fundamental labor rights? 

Ambassador SAPIRO. Thank you, Senator, for raising the labor 

questions that we too thought were so important to address. Panama has issued administrative decrees to deal with better implementation and enforcement of laws pertaining to subcontracting, to 

temporary worker protections, and also to protections in the maritime sector, to give you just a few examples. 

In each case, over the last year and a half, we have watched Panama implement these provisions with stepped-up inspections, with 

complaint mechanisms, with awareness campaigns, and other ways 

to make sure that all of its employers are fully complying. We did 

not perceive a specific gap in terms of the number of inspectors, 

and the fact that they have been able to carry out, in some cases, 

over 1,000 inspections in certain sectors already, I think bodes well 

for their continued commitment here. 

Senator MENENDEZ. How confident are you that Panama has, 

based upon that, both the wherewithal and the will to enforce their 

legislation in this regard? And I know you mentioned the maritime 

sector. That is a big part of that economy. So do you believe that 

new legislation intended to protect the right to collectively bargain 

is going to be adequately protected and enforced? 

Ambassador SAPIRO. I do. I think the commitment runs from 

President Martinelli on down. The fact that they were able to also 

pass legislation recently to remove some of the exemptions that 

they had provided in the Baru ́ Economic Development Zone, for example, or that they had provided to companies less than 2 years 

old, or to companies in the Export Processing Zones, removing 

those exceptions, as limited as they were, nonetheless was an important step both substantively, and I think also symbolically, to 

show the government’s firm commitment to these important issues 

and to moving forward in the right way. 

Senator MENENDEZ. All right. One other concern that I have is 

the question of intellectual property, particularly with copyright piracy. I understand piracy rates for computer software have been as 

16 

high as 78 percent and over 50 percent for music in Panama. Notwithstanding the provisions included in this free trade agreement, 

how confident are you and how prepared is USTR to dedicate the 

necessary human capital to see that intellectual property rights 

provisions are enforced? 

Ambassador SAPIRO. Well, some people, when they talk about 

USTR and IPR, call us lean but mean. We take a very firm approach to making sure that all of our commitments that we have 

received from our partners are enforced. One of the many advantages, the many benefits of the FTA, is that it does have a very 

strong intellectual property rights protection chapter. 

We do not currently have that ability to see Panama uphold 

those rights simply as a result of its status as a WTO member, so 

this FTA gives us far more important obligations than we currently 

would otherwise have, and also enables us to make sure that they 

are being upheld. 

It deals not just with piracy, but also with counterfeiting. It also 

addresses issues in the digital environment, also requires there to 

be temporary protection measures that are difficult, if not impossible, to circumvent. So there are a number of protections that we 

believe are very important that we will see come into force once 

Congress approves this agreement. 

Senator MENENDEZ. Well, I appreciate hearing that, because the 

President’s call for innovation and for the Nation to continue to 

lead the world in innovation is, at the end of the day, a fruitless 

exercise if, after all the innovation, people can just take the intellectual property and subvert it to their own purposes and undermine the very essence of the investment we make here in America. 

So, this is incredibly important, and I am looking forward to that 

type of robust action by the agency. 

Mr. Chairman, this is one of the trade agreements that I have 

probably the greatest comfort with, notwithstanding my concerns. 

The CHAIRMAN. I am for that. 

Senator MENENDEZ. So I just appreciate you having the hearing. 

Thank you. 

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you. You raised a very interesting point, 

too, about protection of intellectual property. I just think it is important to remind all of us that the United States does not have 

near the problem protecting intellectual property with our FTA 

partners as it does with non-FTA countries because of stronger enforcement and much stronger protections. It is another reason generally why these agreements tend to make some sense. 

I might add, too, in response to Senator Stabenow’s questions 

about TAA, here is a slight problem. Once the FTAs are sent up, 

they are on an automatic fast-tracked procedure. That is not true 

with TAA. So there has to be an agreement on how Trade Adjustment Assistance is handled before the FTAs are sent up to the 

Congress by the President. I just urge all of us to figure all that 

out and for all of us to recognize that, because there are some who 

may advocate just saying, the administration is sending up the 

FTAs, thinking, well, we will work out TAA later. The trouble is, 

FTAs enjoy a certain fast-track process here that TAA does not 

enjoy, so that has to all be worked out in advance. 

Senator Hatch? 

17 

Senator HATCH. Thank you. 

Now I ask you, Ambassador Sapiro, how many jobs will we lose? 

I would just as soon have you explain not just how many we will 

lose in Panama if we do not have this trade agreement, but let us 

include the Colombia and Korea agreements as well. The argument 

here is that we have to have Trade Adjustment Assistance for 

workers who are going to lose their jobs. I do not see how they are 

going to lose their jobs. Most of the exports from the U.S. will be 

agricultural exports, and everything I have looked at says we will 

create jobs if we can do these three trade agreements and that people in this country will benefit greatly, not only from jobs, but from 

the additional approximately $13 billion of trade that will come 

from these three trade agreements. 

In the case of Panama, what is there about this free trade agreement that is going to cost any jobs? For some reason, I am missing 

something here. I mean, it looks to me like—I admit that the 

unions are the strongest supporters of Democrats, but is there not 

a point—what they are asking for is $7.2 billion over 10 years, or 

right around $5 billion over 5 years, because of so-called lost jobs. 

But I do not see where they lose any jobs. We are going to gain jobs by having $13 billion worth or more of trade with these three 

agreements. What really bothers me is, I do not see where you lose 

any jobs at all with Panama, and yet we are treating them like dirt 

by not having these agreements. I mean, I admit that you have a 

lot of pressure from the unions on this, but it is just another free 

gift to the unions, it looks like to me, when it fact it may benefit 

them. All three of these agreements would benefit them. I would 

just like your viewpoint: how many jobs are going to be lost, and 

where are they? In what part of the economy will they be lost? 

Ambassador SAPIRO. Senator, let me try to respond to each of 

your points. 

Senator HATCH. All right. 

Ambassador SAPIRO. We do not have an estimate from the ITC 

on the number of jobs with respect to Panama, so that is why I did 

not provide a number earlier. But I can say that overall we feel 

confident that all three agreements will boost our exports and 

thereby create or sustain more American jobs. 

Senator HATCH. Right. 

Ambassador SAPIRO. We are fully committed to doing that. 

Senator HATCH. Right. 

Ambassador SAPIRO. The purpose of the TAA program—which 

has always been bipartisan in nature and passed with strong support from this committee in particular—the purpose is to help 

those workers whose jobs are dislocated by trade. So when a trade 

agreement or existing agreements—though we expect it will create 

and sustain new jobs in certain sectors, it can well lead to the dislocation and has in the past of other workers. So the TAA program 

is so important. 

Senator HATCH. Give me some illustration of some workers who 

are going to lose their jobs because of the Panamanian agreement. 

I mean, tell me one job that will be lost. I cannot even think of one 

job that is going to be lost. We will gain jobs. You admit that we 

will gain jobs with these three trade agreements. We will gain jobs 

with Panama. But we are treating an ally, a friend, and a wonderVerDate Nov 24 2008 20:30 Feb 28, 2013 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00021 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 R:\DOCS\79458.000 TIMD
18 

ful country that means a great deal to us in America, like dirt so 

that we can pay off the unions who are not going to lose any jobs. 

Ambassador SAPIRO. They are indeed one of our strongest partners in Central America. We work closely with them every day. We 

have the highest respect and—— 

Senator HATCH. Fine. But what jobs are going to be lost? 

Ambassador SAPIRO. We have mutual respect for this relationship. So I feel, and I think they feel, that we have a very good partnership, and this agreement will make it even stronger. Our work 

to get to this point has made our partnership even stronger. 

Senator HATCH. That does not answer my question. How many 

jobs will we lose if we implement this agreement with Panama 

without Trade Adjustment Assistance? 

Ambassador SAPIRO. I do not have, as I mentioned, job estimates 

with respect to Panama. 

Senator HATCH. I do not think we will lose one. 

Ambassador SAPIRO. But I can say that Trade Adjustment Assistance is vital to help American workers who are hurting. They 

are hurting because—— 

Senator HATCH. Well, wait a minute. We are saying that we 

should hold up these agreements so that we can put billions of dollars out to help American workers who are hurting, but are not 

being hurt by these agreements. In fact, they will benefit from 

these agreements. I do not understand the logic. I do not mean to 

be picking on you, it is just, it is driving me nuts that the administration—and it looks like just a pay-off to the unions. If you can 

show me where the job losses are, I imagine that this would go a 

lot better. 

I do not see where we are losing jobs. I think we gain jobs. We 

would have net gain in trade, which creates jobs in this country. 

In Panama, I do not think you can show me one American job that 

is going to be lost. Why should we put up $7.2 billion over 10 years, 

in a country that is currently broke, just because the unions want 

it and because there may be some people suffering—let us find 

some other way of doing it that is justified rather than holding up 

these free trade agreements that are so crucial, it seems to me, to 

our relationships, especially in Panama and Colombia, but even 

more especially in some ways because of the total amount of trade 

in Korea. 

These are countries that we want to keep total friendship with. 

In fact, I hope we can keep friendship with all countries, but especially these three. I just do not see it, personally, and I understand 

you have a tough situation explaining it. But my goodness, I do not 

see where any jobs are lost. Now, maybe I am just over-simplifying, 

I do not know, but I do not think so. 

Ambassador SAPIRO. Do I have time to respond? 

Senator HATCH. Sure. 

Ambassador SAPIRO. I find it simple to explain because it is so 

important. We talk about moving these agreements forward consistent with both our economic values and our core values. Trade 

Adjustment Assistance, helping those American workers who are 

hurting today because their jobs have been dislocated by trade and 

because they need training, retraining to move into new fields, is 

a core value, is essential. 

19 

Senator HATCH. But you cannot name one American job that is 

going to be lost. You know that. So Trade Adjustment Assistance 

has no relation to these trade agreements. 

The CHAIRMAN. Let me just jump in here and try to get some 

sanity and civility to this discussion. 

Senator HATCH. Well, I do not think I am being insane by asking 

these questions. 

The CHAIRMAN. No, no. But the point is this. 

Senator HATCH. I think the administration is being insane by 

socking it to the American taxpayers who are broke now. 

The CHAIRMAN. No, no, no, no. No, the point is this. We do not 

have a Panama TAA, we do not have a Colombia TAA, we do not 

have a Korea TAA, we do not have any specific country TAA. We 

have Trade Adjustment Assistance generally for American workers 

who lose their jobs on account of trade. Our current TAA expired 

in February. There is no law today which allows people who lose 

their jobs on account of trade, through no fault of their own, to get 

assistance. 

Senator HATCH. So we are going to hold up these three trade 

agreements because you do not have a TAA? 

The CHAIRMAN. No. The point is, this place really only operates 

when we work together as a team. 

Senator HATCH. Well, I want to work together. 

The CHAIRMAN. And the teamwork is, get the FTAs passed and 

the TAA reauthorized. That is the package, that is the framework, 

that is the teamwork. I hope very much we can do that, because 

then we can get the FTAs passed. 

Ambassador SAPIRO. And we want to move forward as quickly as 

possible on the FTAs and on TAA together. 

The CHAIRMAN. Right. I know you do. 

Thank you all very much. The hearing is adjourned. 

[Whereupon, at 11:12 a.m., the hearing was concluded.] 

(21) 

A P P E N D I X 

ADDITIONAL MATERIAL SUBMITTED FOR THE RECORD


79458001.eps
22 


79458.002
23 


79458.003
24 


79458.004
25 


79458.005
26 


79458.006
27 


79458.007
28 


79458.008
29 


79458.009
30 


79458.010
31 


79458.011
32 


79458.012
33 


79458.013
34 


79458.014
35 


79458.015
36 


79458.016
37 


79458.017
38 


79458.018
39 


79458.019
40 


79458.020
41 


79458.021
(43) 

COMMUNICATIONS


79458022.eps
44 


79458.023
45 


79458.024
46 


79458.025
47 


79458.026
48 


79458.027
49 


79458.028
50 


79458.029
51 


79458.030
52 

Æ 


79458031.eps