Trade Promotion Authority and Fast-Track Negotiating Authority for Trade Agreements: Major Votes
Released: 2011-01-12T00:00:00

Summary:
This report profiles significant legislation, including floor votes, that authorized the use of presidential Trade Promotion Authority (TPA)—previously known as fast-track trade negotiating authority—since its inception in 1974. The report also includes a list of floor votes since 1979 on implementing legislation for trade agreements that were passed under TPA fast-track procedures. Although TPA expired on July 1, 2007, four free trade agreements (FTAs) were signed in time to be considered under TPA expedited procedures in the 110th Congress. The U.S.-Peru Trade Promotion Agreement Implementation Act was passed by Congress (H.R. 3688) and signed into law as P.L. 110-138 on December 14, 2007. The legislative future of three proposed U.S FTAs (with Colombia, Panama, and South Korea) is uncertain. For further discussions of TPA or fast-track legislative activity, the report lists CRS reports and Internet resources.
This report will be updated as events warrant in the 112th Congress.

subsections: section_title: Legislative Background Information
paragraphs: Fast-track is an expedited procedure for congressional consideration of certain trade agreements. This process is tied to the President's authority provided by Congress to enter into trade agreements to reduce U.S. tariff and non-tariff barriers with other countries. The fast-track authority provides that Congress will consider trade agreement implementing bills within mandatory deadlines, with a limitation on debate, and without amendment, as long as the President meets prescribed requirements set out by law.
Under the Reciprocal Trade Agreements Act of 1934 (P.L. 73-316), Congress delegated renewable authority to the President to negotiate reciprocal tariff reductions. The Trade Act of 1974 ( P.L. 93-618 ) expanded this authority to include negotiations of nontariff trade barriers, but required more extensive reporting and consultations between Congress and the President during trade negotiations. This act also had a provision under which Congress would consider implementing bills for trade agreements under expedited congressional procedures, known as fast-track. Table 1 shows how Congress renewed fast-track authority on particular dates. In the years following the expiration of fast-track authority in 1994, there were several legislative proposals to reauthorize the trade authority procedures; these bills, including H.R. 2621 in the 105 th Congress, did not pass.
In the 107 th Congress, several legislative proposals on trade promotion authority (TPA) were considered. The original House version of the Bipartisan Trade Promotion Authority Act ( H.R. 3005 ) passed by one vote on December 6, 2001 (215-214). Another bill, H.R. 3009 , was amended several times in the House and the Senate to include additional trade issues. Following House and Senate negotiations and agreement to the conference report for H.R. 3009 , the President signed H.R. 3009 , as P.L. 107-210 , the Trade Act of 2002, on August 6, 2002. This major piece of trade legislation has the TPA provisions in Title XXI, Section 210l, as the Bipartisan Trade Promotion Authority Act of 2002. TPA procedures apply to implementing bills for trade agreements entered into before July 1, 2007.
Although TPA expired on July 1, 2007, four proposed U.S. free trade agreements (FTAs) were signed in time to be considered by Congress under TPA procedures in the 110 th Congress; the U.S. FTAs were negotiated separately with the countries of Peru, Colombia, Panama, and South Korea. The implementing legislation for the U.S.-Peru Trade Promotion Agreement was passed by Congress and signed by the President on December 14, 2007 ( P.L. 110-138 ).
Also in the 110 th Congress, H.R. 5724 was introduced as implementing legislation for the U.S.-Colombia Trade Promotion Agreement. On April 10, 2008, the House passed H.Res. 1092 , relating to H.R. 5724 ; this resolution provided a rule that disallowed the use of time limitations for consideration of the implementing bill. No further legislative action on H.R. 5724 occurred in the 110 th Congress.
In the 111 th Congress, no legislation for the three proposed U.S. trade agreements (with the countries of Colombia, Panama, and South Korea) was introduced. The fate of the three FTAs is uncertain in the 112 th Congress. More detailed information on congressional and executive procedures for TPA and free trade agreements can be found in the "Resources for Additional Information," at the end of this report.
In Table 1 , some of the listed bills focus solely on fast-track trade negotiating authority or TPA. Other bills are major landmarks of trade legislation , of which fast-track is only one of many trade provisions. These major trade acts, in boldface, include the Trade Act of 1974, the Trade Agreements Act of 1979, the Trade and Tariff Act of 1984, the Omnibus Trade and Competitiveness Act of 1988, and the Trade Act of 2002.
Congress has applied fast-track legislative procedures to approve several reciprocal bilateral and multilateral trade agreements. Table 2 lists the uses of fast-track procedures in the implementation of trade agreements from 1979 to the present. The table does not include the implementing legislation for the U.S.-Jordan Free Trade Agreement ( H.R. 2603 enacted as P.L. 107-43 on September 28, 2001); Congress did not consider this bill under fast-track procedures.
In the 108 th Congress, implementing legislation for free trade agreements was passed under fast-track procedures on four separate bills:
H.R. 2738 , the U.S.-Chile Free Trade Agreement Implementation Act, was signed on September 3, 2003 ( P.L. 108-77 ). On the same day, H.R. 2739 , the U.S.-Singapore Free Trade Agreement Implementation Act, was signed into law ( P.L. 108-78 ). H.R. 4759 , the U.S.-Australia Free Trade Agreement Act, was signed by the President on August 3, 2004 ( P.L. 108-286 ). On August 17, 2004, H.R. 4842 , the U.S.-Morocco Free Trade Agreement Implementation Act, was signed into law ( P.L. 108-302 ).
In the 109 th Congress, implementing legislation for three free trade agreements was passed under fast-track procedures on three separate bills:
H.R. 3045 , the Dominican Republic-Central America-United States Free Trade Agreement Implementation Act (CAFTA-DR), was signed by the President on August 2, 2005 ( P.L. 109-53 ). H.R. 4340 , the U.S.-Bahrain Free Trade Agreement Implementation Act, was signed into law on January 11, 2006 (P.L. 109-169). H.R. 5684 , the U.S.-Oman Free Trade Agreement Implementation Act, was signed into law on September 26, 2006 (P.L. 109-283).
Although TPA expired on July 1, 2007, four proposed FTAs (with Peru, Colombia, Panama, and South Korea) were signed in time to be considered by Congress under TPA procedures in the 110 th Congress. H.R. 3688 , the U.S.-Peru Trade Promotion Agreement Implementation Act, was passed by the House on November 8, 2007, and by the Senate on December 4, 2007. This bill was signed into law on December 14, 2007 (P.L. 110-138).
In the 110 th Congress, H.R. 5724 was introduced to implement the proposed U.S.-Colombia Trade Promotion Agreement. H.Res. 1092 was introduced as a rule change for consideration of H.R. 5724 only; this resolution disallowed the use of time limitations for consideration of the implementing bill under fast-track procedures. H.Res. 1092 passed the House on April 10, 2008 (224-195). No further legislative action on H.R. 5724 occurred in the 110 th Congress.
In the 111 th Congress, no implementing legislation for the three proposed FTAs (with the countries of South Korea, Colombia, and Panama) was introduced.
In the 112 th Congress, the fate of the three proposed FTAs is uncertain.
section_title: Resources for Additional Information
paragraphs: CRS Report RL33743, Trade Promotion Authority (TPA) and the Role of Congress in Trade Policy , by [author name scrubbed] and [author name scrubbed].
CRS Report RL31356, Free Trade Agreements: Impact on U.S. Trade and Implications for U.S. Trade Policy , by [author name scrubbed].
CRS Report 97-896, Why Certain Trade Agreements Are Approved as Congressional-Executive Agreements Rather Than as Treaties , by [author name scrubbed].
CRS Report R41544, Trade Promotion Authority and the Korea Free Trade Agreement , by [author name scrubbed].
Office of the United States Trade Representative (USTR) website, with a section on "Trade Agreements" discussing the status of U.S. trade agreements and negotiations, at http://www.ustr.gov/ trade-agreements/ , and information on "Free Trade Agreements" at http://www.ustr.gov/ trade-agreements/ free-trade-agreements/ .