United States Austrailia Free Trade Agreement Implementation Act

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD
SENATE
UNITED STATES-AUSTRALIA FREE TRADE AGREEMENT IMPLEMENTATION ACT

Mr. JEFFORDS. Mr. President, I firmly believe that free and fair economic relations between nations will accrue to the benefit of all parties. Our country was founded on the principle that all States would benefit from the free flow of commerce between equal parties. And our national economy has proved this to be true.

These same dynamics now operate on a global scale. Commerce can now reach around the globe with ease. Communications are instantaneous, even in the most isolated places. Our trading laws must keep pace with the emerging patterns. We must move to shape the emerging global marketplace into a productive and fair system-not sit back and condemn its advances and decry the loss of old economic structures. We can either be in the lead of this evolution, or we will be sidelined by it. I believe that America can and must exert leadership. One way we must assert leadership is by the negotiation of trade agreements that will lower the barriers to trade and level the playing fields for all players.

Trade agreements come together more naturally with developed nations that share our commitment to rule of law, strong worker protections and strict environmental controls. Australia is such a country. Even so, it has been difficult to resolve the differences in our two economies and allow protections for particularly vulnerable elements of each economy. Negotiations have taken place over a considerable length of time, and no side has gotten everything they want.

The provisions in the agreement relating to dairy, for instance, are an example of not getting all that we would like. I joined a bipartisan group of 30 Senators in a letter to the chief US trade negotiator, Ambassador Robert Zoellick, expressing our concerns for our Nation's dairy farmers and requesting favorable treatment for this struggling national industry. Under this agreement, imports may amount to two-tenths of 1 percent of U.S. dairy production. While I would have preferred no market penetration by Australian dairy imports, I am confident that our industry is strong enough to meet this competition. Additionally, this agreement will open up new markets for Vermont's dairy products. I am confident Vermont farmers will be able to take strong advantage of this opportunity.

Some concerns have been raised about provisions relating to prescription drugs. Transparency provisions in this agreement related to Government procurement decisions are designed to provide equal rights of appeal. The US Trade Representative, USTR, has indicated that these provisions will not require any changes in U.S. pharmaceutical purchasing programs. There has also been discussion about a provision in this agreement related to drug reimportation. As a strong supporter of passing drug reimportation legislation, I would not want to endorse any curtailment of future drug reimportation opportunities. In this case, however, Australian law prohibits the export of any drugs purchased through its government-subsidized program, the majority of all drugs sold in Australia. As a central part of the Australian Government's drug program, there is no reason to think that this prohibition would change. But I also warn USTR that it would be unacceptable to include language similar to article 17.9.4 in future trade agreements where reimportation might be an option in the event of a change in U.S. law. I am sure that the intense discussions around these provisions over the last few days have made this point quite clearly.

As with all significant agreements, we will find flaws and challenges with this agreement as it unfolds. But as international dispute mechanisms are perfected, we become better at settling them equitably and expeditiously. The future of our economy and the health of the global economy are dependent upon us improving our ability to devise more equitable and open trading systems.

The disparities between the economies of the developed world and the less-developed world continue to grow. This agreement comes between economies of equal strength, even though not of equal size. The experience we gain here in how to remove barriers to trade while protecting vital interests will inform us of how to more successfully tackle the difficult trade relations between our economy and those less-stable economies. Some would argue that the easiest way to relate to weaker economies is to put up greater barriers to trade-to prevent the export of any U.S. capital and prevent the entrance of any lower-priced goods into our market. I am more of an optimist than that. I believe that we can do better than lock out whole sectors of the global economy. I believe we must make efforts, learn from our mistakes, and move ahead to strengthen the flow of commerce, the equity of business and the opportunity for all people to earn a living.