Date: 2009-12-14
Speaker: LINDA T. SANCHEZ (democrat)
Chamber: H
State: California

Madam Speaker. I rise in support of H.R. 4284. the Andean Trade Preference Extension Act of 2009 (ATPA). which would extend both the General System of Preferences (GSP) and the Andean Trade Preferences for one year. It is important to extend these preference programs. which assist developing countries in their efforts to build up domestic industries. increase exports. and alleviate poverty. In some cases. these programs have worked well. South Korea. Singapore. and other nations have graduated from the GSP program. and no longer qualify for these special trade benefits. Failure to extend these preferences would put even more pressure on impoverished populations in developing nations. Make no mistake. my support for this extension is not an unqualified endorsement of their current structure. To be sure. our preferences programs need improvement. One key improvement that is desperately needed is to change the prevailing view that trade preferences are a development strategy. Instead. we must recognize that trade preferences are only part of a comprehensive development strategy. which must also include investments in education. training. and infrastructure. as well as a consideration of targeted debt relief. In addition. our preferences programs currently have inadequatelyenforced labor standards and no environmental standards whatsoeve r. The rationale for linking trade and labor rights is vital to avoiding a "race to the bottom." For American working families. we need to ensure that developing countries attract investment based on a competitive wage advantage. not by artificially suppressing wages through labor repression. For working families in developing countries. the opportunity to bargain collectively for better wages and working conditions will ensure that some of the benefits of trade go to them. not just to multinational corporations. This oneyear extension will give us the time we need to reform existing programs without disrupting the fragile economies of the lesserdeveloped nations that our preferences programs are designed to help. Finally. I want to address the issue of Ecuador in particular. Unfortunately. it has come to my attention that Chevron Corporation has been urging Members of Congress and the Administration to punish Ecuador because its government refuses to intervene in a private lawsuit against the oil giant. The plaintiffs in the lawsuit contend that the company is responsible for polluting a vast area of the Amazon Basin. causing serious health and environmental consequences. While I take no position on the lawsuit. I do believe that the plaintiffs should have their day in court. I also believe that. of all the legitimate reasons to oppose the U.S. trade preferences programs. doing the bidding of a single corporation is not one of them. As the editors of the Los Angeles Times wrote in a recent editorial. "There are other factors for Congress to consider in determining whether to extend Ecuadors trade preferences: workers rights and trade and investment policy also are important. And there are issues that remain to be negotiated between the two countries. But in each of these areas. Ecuador has demonstrated a willingness to work with the U.S. That should be the test for an extension of trade benefits. not the private interests of one corporation." To reiterate. while our trade preferences programs are not perfect. extending them for one year is vital. and I strongly support this legislation.