Trade Issues

TRADE ISSUES -- (Senate - November 14, 2005)

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. DORGAN. Mr. President, I was just asked by a news reporter about the President's trip to Asia. The President is now going to Japan, Korea, and China and will be talking, presumably, about a wide range of issues, including trade. My hope certainly is that he will talk about trade.

Last month, we had a trade deficit of $66 billion--in 1 month--one-third of it from China. When the President goes to China, he could visit a lot of American jobs because the jobs that used to be here in America exist now in China--jobs that made bicycles, Radio Flyer's Little Red Wagon, Tony Lama boots. The jobs that used to make a wide range of products now exist in China. An American President--any American President--visiting China could visit a lot of American jobs. They are not the same kind of jobs that existed in America because in America, in most cases, those jobs were performed by employees who made a decent wage and who had benefits. No longer, in most cases. Those jobs in China are being performed by people who are being paid a small amount of money and no benefits.

By the way, if they complain about the working conditions, they will be either fired or put in prison.

As the President goes to China in the shadow of last month's devastating announcement of a $66 billion monthly trade deficit, one-third of it coming from China, what should the President do? It seems to me the President, with respect to China, Japan, and Korea--all three of those countries--should begin to get tough and exhibit on the part of this country a backbone that says to countries with whom we do business, we expect and demand and deserve fair trade.

Fair trade means it is mutually beneficial. It is not fair, and it is not mutually beneficial when last month--when the last month for which we had reporting--we bought one dollar's worth of goods from China, and for every dollar's worth of goods from China we sold them 10 cents' worth. A dollar and 10 cents--that is not fair trade. With a $66 billion trade deficit, with nearly 20 percent of it coming from the country of China, we ought to expect something substantially different.

The Commerce Department announced that the trade deficit that shattered all records was in the month of September. Our country had a trade deficit of $66 billion.

This is what it looks like. Our country is choking in red ink. Behind this red are American jobs leaving for China. Companies know they can simply get rid of their American workers and save a lot of money by hiring people in Third World countries--in this case, China--and they can presumably boost their profits believing, apparently, that people are like wrenches and pliers. You just get rid of them when you are done with them and find something less expensive. Go and hire that less expensive commodity--in this case ``commoditizing'' labor.

This is what our trade deficit looks like with China. We have a $220 billion annual deficit with China. You can see what has happened. We are sinking into a deep abyss with respect to the trade deficit with China.

One of the reasons for the trade deficit is piracy and counterfeiting. That is just one of the reasons.

Let me describe something interesting. This happens to be the logo for the 2008 Chinese Olympics. It says: Beijing 2008. It is a great-looking logo. It actually

belongs to the Chinese. The Chinese know how valuable a logo like this is because in Greece they had the logo for the Greek Olympics, and I am told they raised something over $850 million with this logo. So the Chinese know.

First of all, this logo belongs to them. Secondly, it is very valuable. And some people on the streets of China decided they were going to counterfeit this logo. They decided, We are going to pirate this logo. They started selling mugs, coffee mugs, banners, all kinds of things with the official Chinese logo on it for the 2008 Olympics.

Guess what. The Chinese Government can, in fact, control piracy and counterfeiting. They demonstrated it.

The President, if he gets out of the car and walks down the street in Beijing, will not find someone selling counterfeit goods. They are gone. They are in prison. They are off the streets. The Chinese Government shut them down, just like that, in an instant.

So when it is their money that is at stake, they understand how to stop piracy and counterfeiting. They do it.

Two-thirds of all counterfeit and pirated goods coming into this country come from China. Does China lift a finger to stop it? Not a finger; don't care; doesn't matter to them. It mattered when it was goring their ox, when they were about ready to lose money. Then it mattered.

So the question is, What do we do about this? I could put up a chart that shows Japan, a $60 billion to $70 billion a year--every single year--trade deficit.

I could put up a chart that shows Korea and talk about my favorite subject with Korea: that little old Dodge pickup truck called the Dodge Dakota. I kind of like the name because it is named after my State--Dakota. It is so wonderful they named a pickup truck after it.

At a time when 700,000 vehicles come into this country over the high seas from Korea to be sold to the American consumers, we are able to sell, if we are lucky, about 3,800 to 3,900 vehicles in Korea. So 700,000 this way, and 3,800 to 3,900 going to Korea.

Why is that? The Koreans don't want American cars in Korea, and 99 percent of the vehicles on the roads in Korea are Korean-made vehicles. That is what the Korean Government wants.

The Dodge Dakota folks thought they would have a niche in Korea selling Dodge Dakota pickup trucks. For the first 3 or 4 months they started selling some. All of a sudden, the Korean Government shut them down just like that. With Japan, with Korea, and with China, the fact is, in all of these cases, governments take action to complete trade arrangements with us that are not mutually beneficial--trade arrangements that hurt us, ship our jobs overseas and help them.

This trip by the President is very important. The question is, Will this country stand up for its own economic interests? There is no evidence in the past that it will.

My colleague, Senator Graham, and I have offered several pieces of legislation on these very issues. But there is a giant yawn on the part of the U.S. Congress, not very interested; giant yawn at the White House, not very interested.

Why is that? It is because most of these policies--I am talking about policies that affect the jobs of our citizens, policies that affect this country's economy, and whether we grow or not, whether people have a good job that pays well with benefits--are viewed through the lens of soft-headed foreign policy and not hard-nosed economic policy.

That is the problem. You have to run all these things by the U.S. State Department to see if we could begin to be a little bit tough and take some action, maybe, with respect to some unfair trade practices of the Chinese. Oh, no. We are worried about offending the Chinese. Don't do it.

They are engaged in managed trade and hard-nosed economic issues, and we are engaged in soft-headed foreign policy.

http://thomas.loc.gov/