S10936 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE December 11, 2008 

Of course, it is not just jobs and production 

we are offshoring, but also research and development, high-end services and critical 

military materials. 

Thus, Congress must also vigorously 

(re)assume its responsibility under Article I, 

Section 8, of the Constitution for regulating 

trade in general. It must protect our important production and standard of living. And 

it must make it profitable to invest and 

produce in the United States. 

A value added tax is in order, and long 

overdue in fact. Every industrialized country 

except the United States has a value added 

tax, which is levied on all imports and rebated to manufacturers whenever they export. Today, however, imports into the 

United States come without any taxes being 

imposed on them, and U.S. manufacturers 

not only must pay all corporate taxes but 

the VAT on their exports. 

A U.S. VAT would immediately remove a 

tremendous disadvantage to production in 

the United States and begin to deter 

outsourcing, and the revenues from it would 

help eliminate both our massive fiscal and 

trade deficits. Since it would take a year for 

business and the Internal Revenue Service to 

gear up for a VAT, in the meantime, we 

should institute a 10% surcharge on imports 

as President Nixon did so successfully in 

1971. 

We must also activate the Commerce Secretary’s list of materials critical to our national security. By placing tariffs or quotas 

on items necessary to our national security 

and producing them in-country, we will not 

only be better prepared to defend ourselves 

but we can put American workers back to 

work. In 1991, Admiral William Crowe, who 

was then Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of 

Staff, warned against the outsourcing of 

military supplies. In Desert Storm we had to 

await Japanese flat-panel displays before invading Kuwait. We had to await Swiss crystals before invading Iraq. Now we can’t 

produce planes unless we get certain parts 

from India, and helicopters unless we get 

parts from Turkey. This nonsense has got to 

stop. 

Of course for years economists have told us 

not to worry about the loss of manufacturing 

jobs, because the United States would simply 

and easily become a high-end service economy. But as Robyn Meredith writes in her 

wonderful book ‘‘The Elephant and the Dragon’’: ‘‘As China has famously become the factory to the world, India is becoming the 

world’s back office . . . As many as 300,000 

American jobs each year will move overseas 

[to India] for the next thirty years—nine 

million jobs in all.’’ 

So then the economists told us to ‘‘educate.’’ But if they are referring to skills, 

South Carolina instituted a skilled training 

program forty-seven years ago, and BMW in 

Spartanburg, S.C. is now producing a better 

quality car than BMW produces in Munich, 

Germany. And South Carolina’s technical 

training program is now being mimicked by 

Intel in Ireland. But no State and not the 

United States can educate their way out of 

unfair competition. 

Then there was NAFTA. I voted for 

NAFTA with Canada because Canada has a 

free market. A country must have a free 

market to have free trade. Mexico doesn’t 

have a free market. I counseled the trade 

policy of the European Union. The EU requires that, before being admitted to the European Union, a country must have developed the entities of a free market like property rights, labor rights, a minimum wage, 

anti-trust provisions, an independent judiciary, etc. Countries of the European Union 

taxed themselves $5 billion for five years to 

develop a free market in Greece and Portugal before admitting them to the EU. Mexico still doesn’t have labor rights. U.S. corporations are known to sign up for a union 

before locating in Mexico, but only pro 

forma—no business agent at the Mexican facility, and the Mexican workers never hear 

of having a union. Under Mexican law, if one 

tries to organize a plant that already has a 

union, you’re fired. On a visit to Tijuana I 

met with 12 workers who were fired because 

they tried to organize a union not knowing 

the plant had one. NAFTA superimposed 

U.S. subsidized corn on two million small 

scale Mexican corn farmers putting them out 

of business. The Mexican farmers headed for 

the border for work. NAFTA not only exacerbated immigration, but the United States 

lost jobs and Mexico’s workers are paid less 

today than before NAFTA. We still ought to 

try the European Union approach in Mexico. 

With the money we spend on fences, Border 

Patrol, immigration, prosecutors, courts, 

jails, deportation, etc., a mini Marshall Plan 

for Mexico could clean up the corruption and 

drug problem and develop a free market in 

Mexico. This will help solve our immigration 

problem. 

As a last stand, the economists raise the 

specter of Smoot-Hawley. The late Senator 

John Heinz of Pennsylvania ‘‘belled that buzzard’’, passing a protectionist trade bill in 

the United States Senate twenty years ago. 

Smoot-Hawley restricting imports did not 

cause the depression. It was enacted eight 

months after the crash. At the time, 1930, 

international trade amounted to only 1.3% of 

our economy. Cordell Hull had us back with 

a plus balance of trade in 1933 with his famous reciprocal free trade policy. The economists’ free trade policy (without reciprocity) 

has caused a hemorrhaging of American jobs, 

production, research, technology, investment and development to China and India. 

Henry Ford not only developed mass production of automobiles, but he also greatly 

contributed to the development of the middle class in America, which is the strength of 

our democracy. Ford doubled the minimum 

wage and provided health care and retirement benefits for labor. He strengthened 

communities with the Ford Foundation, and 

business was diligent to keep America’s 

economy strong. And we in Congress got in 

the habit of following business’s lead on the 

economy, adopting Corporate America’s suggestions for production, marketing and competition. 

But in globalization, Corporate America’s 

leadership for trade and a strong economy 

has been ‘‘outsourced.’’ The industrial icon, 

Jack Welch, once announced at GE’s annual 

meeting that GE suppliers had to move to 

Mexico to produce a less-costly product or no 

longer be considered a GE supplier. 

Well, I worked with Corporate America to 

protect America’s investment and production. 

When I was in the Senate, I worked with 

Corporate America to keep our textile industry strong by passing a protectionist trade 

bill in 1968. President Lyndon Johnson, however, had Wilbur Mills, the powerful Chairman of the House Ways & Means Committee, 

block the measure. Again with the assistance of Corporate America, I helped pass 

four protectionist trade bills through both 

Houses of Congress only to see each of them 

vetoed—one by President Jimmy Carter, two 

by President Ronald Reagan, and one by 

President George H. W. Bush. 

Presidents back then were anxious that 

capitalism defeat communism in the Cold 

War and weren’t worried about our economy. 

Denied protection by Democratic and Republican administrations, Corporate America 

began outsourcing and offshoring. Now Corporate America opposes our government 

competing in globalization with chants of 

‘‘free trade,’’ ‘‘protectionism,’’ ‘‘don’t start a 

trade war.’’ Now, our nation’s business leaders and their economists, use every trick in 

the book to mislead on ‘‘protectionism.’’ 

They form organizations like The Trilateral 

Commission and The Business Roundtable, 

they promote books like ‘‘The World is Flat’’ 

to warn against protectionism, and even the 

U.S. Chamber of Commerce is more interested in commerce on Main Street, Shanghai 

than on Main Street, Spartanburg. The truth 

is globalization has become nothing more 

than a trade war, with the U.S. AWOL. And 

all the while, some major economists oppose 

any measure to protect our domestic production and economy, and they have become a 

‘‘fifth column’’ in the trade war. 

As Sir James Goldsmith testified before 

the Committee of Commerce in the United 

States Senate in 1994: ‘‘It must surely be a 

mistake to adopt an economic policy which 

makes you rich if you eliminate your national workforce and transfer your production abroad, and which bankrupts you if you 

continue to employ your own people.’’ 

But sadly, that’s our policy today. Only 

the President and Congress can change it! 

As President Lincoln said: ‘‘As our case is 

new, we must think anew and act anew. We 

must disenthrall ourselves [from free trade 

economists] and then we shall save our country.’’ 

f 

WILLIAM WILBERFORCE TRAFFICKING VICTIMS PROTECTION 

REAUTHORIZATION ACT 

Mr. DURBIN. Madam President, yesterday, on the 60th anniversary of the 

Universal Declaration of Human 

Rights, the Senate and House passed an 

important and comprehensive human 

rights bill: the William Wilberforce 

Trafficking Victims Protection Reauthorization Act of 2008. I was a cosponsor of this bill in the Senate and celebrate its passage. I commend the leadership of Senators BIDEN and 

BROWNBACK, Representatives HOWARD

BERMAN and CHRIS SMITH, and their 

staffs, for working with Federal agencies and service providers to craft a 

consensus, bipartisan bill that will enhance our national and global fight 

against the scourge of human trafficking. The TVPRA will strengthen 

the Federal Government’s ability to 

prosecute traffickers, protect trafficking victims, and prevent future 

crimes. 

It is impossible to discuss Congress’s 

efforts to address the issue of human 

trafficking without acknowledging the 

invaluable contributions made by the 

late Paul Wellstone and the late Tom 

Lantos. Senator Wellstone was the 

moral conscience of the Senate, and he 

was the driving force behind the initial 

antitrafficking legislation passed by 

Congress in 2000 and signed into law by 

President Clinton. 

Representative Lantos, who introduced the first version of the TVPRA 

in 2007, passed away earlier this year 

after nearly three decades of distinguished service in the House of Representatives. He was the only Holocaust survivor ever to serve in Congress, and this experience as a victim 

of the 20th century’s gravest human 

rights atrocity made him one of the 

leading voices in our time on human 

rights. 

December 11, 2008 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE S10937 

Passage of the TVPRA is a tribute to 

the leadership and legacies of Senator 

Wellstone and Representative Lantos. 

I am pleased that the authors of the 

TVPRA included two of my human 

rights initiatives from the 110th Congress. First, the TVPRA contains a law 

enforcement initiative I introduced 

with Senator COBURN called the Trafficking in Persons Accountability Act, 

which will allow Federal prosecutors to 

investigate and prosecute traffickers 

found in the United States even if their 

trafficking crimes were committed 

abroad. This initiative, which I discussed in more detail in a CONGRESSIONAL RECORD statement on October 1, 

2008, makes an important statement 

about this nation’s intolerance for 

human rights abuses wherever they 

occur. 

The Justice Department’s Civil 

Rights Division, working with other 

DOJ components and with U.S. attorney’s offices around the country, 

brought a record number of trafficking 

prosecutions in fiscal year 2008, and the 

TVPRA provides the Justice Department with additional tools—including 

the Trafficking in Persons Accountability Act—to continue its vigorous 

fight against human trafficking. 

The TVPRA also includes another 

human rights initiative of mine—the 

Child Soldier Prevention Act—to deter 

the use of children as soldiers in armed 

conflicts around the world. Each day, 

up to 250,000 children are exploited in 

state-run armies, paramilitaries, and 

guerilla groups around the world. 

These child soldiers serve as combatants, porters, human mine detectors, 

and sex slaves. Their health and lives 

are endangered and their childhoods 

are sacrificed. The lasting effects of 

war and abuse may also remain with 

them long after the shooting stops. 

The Child Soldier Prevention Act, 

which I introduced with Senator 

BROWNBACK in 2007, is designed to encourage governments to disarm, demobilize, and rehabilitate child soldiers that are being used and abused in 

government forces and governmentsupported militias. Using the State Department’s Country Reports on Human 

Rights as a barometer, this bill limits 

the provision of U.S. International 

Military Education and Training, Foreign Military Financing, and other defense-related assistance in our foreign 

operations programs for countries that 

use child soldiers. Countries that are 

identified in a Human Rights Report as 

recruiting or using child soldiers in 

government armed forces or government-supported paramilitaries or militias in violation of international standards would lose their eligibility for 

substantial U.S. assistance. 

Ishmael Beah made a compelling case 

for the urgent need for this legislation 

in his testimony last year before my 

Senate Judiciary Subcommittee on 

Human Rights and the Law, and in his 

firsthand account of his years as a 

child soldier in Sierra Leone in his 

book ‘‘A Long Way Gone: Memoirs of a 

Boy Soldier.’’ In his testimony before 

my subcommittee, Mr. Beah said: 

As I speak to you, there are thousands of 

children from ages 8 to 17—in Burma, Sri 

Lanka, Congo, Uganda, Ivory Coast, Colombia, just to name a few places—that are 

being forced to fight and lose their childhoods and their families. They are maimed 

and lose their humanity, and these are the 

fortunate ones. Those who are less fortunate 

are killed in the senseless wars of adults. 

There are credible reports that children are again being recruited to fight 

in the Democratic Republic of Congo, a 

country that has suffered a recent horrific surge in violence after years of 

being ravaged by war, and a country 

that receives U.S. military assistance. 

The United Nations Children’s Fund reports that the forced recruitment of 

children as soldiers in Congo is widespread and on the rise. Since the most 

recent outbreak of violence in August, 

more than 250,000 people have been displaced. According to the U.N., children 

who flee their homes are often separated from their families, and therefore 

left unprotected and vulnerable to warring parties that force them into their 

armies. 

The use of child soldiers directly contravenes U.S. policy and the Optional 

Protocol to the Convention on the 

Rights of the Child on the Involvement 

of Children in Armed Conflict, which 

the United States ratified in 2002. The 

United States has a moral obligation 

to avoid funding armed forces that use 

child soldiers. I am proud that with the 

passage of the TVPRA, we have taken 

an important step to try to stop this 

abhorrent practice. 

Finally, I want to highlight an important provision in the TVPRA that 

will crack down on foreign diplomats 

in the United States who abuse their 

domestic employees. At a Human 

Rights and the Law Subcommittee 

hearing I chaired in 2007 regarding 

human trafficking, we heard testimony 

from a distinguished human rights lawyer, Martina Vandenberg, who represents several trafficking victims in 

lawsuits against their traffickers. Due 

to the doctrine of diplomatic immunity, a legal principle that exempts 

certain government officials from the 

jurisdiction of U.S. courts, Ms. Vandenberg indicated that such lawsuits are 

routinely dismissed. 

A July 2008 GAO report, which Senator COBURN and I requested, revealed 

that there have been 42 documented allegations in the United States of unlawful abuse, exploitation, or human 

trafficking by foreign diplomats with 

immunity since 2000, and that the Justice Department has opened 19 criminal 

investigations of foreign diplomats in 

the past three years alone. These are 

not isolated incidents. 

The TVPRA requires the Secretary of 

State to suspend the issuance of A–3 

and G–5 visas—used for the hiring of 

non-U.S. citizens as domestic workers—with respect to foreign diplomats 

employed by a country or international 

organization that has a record of tolerating the abuse or exploitation of domestic workers. The act also prevents 

such visas from being issued or renewed unless the domestic worker 

meets personally with a U.S. consular 

official outside the presence of the employer to go over their employment 

rights and protections. And the act 

contains a robust reporting requirement that will help keep Congress informed about future incidents of abuse 

of A–3 and G–5 visa holders, as well as 

about options to ensure that victims 

receive appropriate compensation if 

their rights are violated but they are 

prevented from seeking a remedy in 

court due to the assertion of diplomatic immunity. 

Human trafficking is a form of modern-day slavery. President-elect 

Barack Obama has called it ‘‘a 

debasement of our common humanity.’’ 

With the passage of the TVPRA—the 

fourth major antitrafficking bill passed 

by Congress in the past 8 years—Congress has once again exercised its 

moral leadership on one of the most urgent human rights challenges of our 

time. 

f 

ANNOUNCING CHRISTOPHER 

JAMES DUFFIELD 

Mr. KYL. Madam President, I rise 

today to announce to the Senate the 

arrival of another Duffield in this 

world. Christopher James Duffield was 

born to his parents, Steven and Cara, 

on the third day of November. Christopher’s father Steven served as the executive director of the Platform Committee at this year’s Republican Convention in Minneapolis. Prior to that, 

Steven served as a senior policy advisor and chief counsel to me at the Republican Policy Committee and the 

Senate Republican Conference. Christopher’s mother, Cara, is a partner at 

the law firm of Wiley Rein. 

Christopher joins us at what is a tumultuous and difficult time for both 

the Nation and the Republican Party. 

On November 4, we Republicans fared 

poorly in Federal elections, losing the 

Presidency and deepening our deficit in 

the House and Senate. The new majority promises to cure the Nation’s economic ills with a Keynesian spending 

spree of the type that worked so brilliantly in the 1930s, and pledges that it 

will reduce taxes for 95 percent of 

Americans, while only increasing them 

for some other guy. Many fear that the 

coming years will put the test to Alexis de Tocqueville’s warning that ‘‘the 

American Republic will endure, until 

politicians realize they can bribe the 

people with their own money.’’ 

Meanwhile, since September of this 

year, the United States has experienced a severe financial crisis, precipitated by the collapse of banks that 

have been overwhelmed by the weight 

of unsound mortgages that they acquired. Many established and storied financial institutions have disappeared 

in bankruptcies and mergers during the 

last few months. As lending has tightened, unemployment has increased, and