What if Democrats Win? Spotlight on Trade

By Martin Vaughan, CongressDaily© National Journal Group Inc.Tuesday, Oct. 17, 2006
This is the second in a series of articles exploring the impact on key committees and issues if Democrats win control of the House and Senate in November’s elections.
With presidential trade negotiating authority set to expire next June, the biggest trade question looming over the next Congress is whether it will be renewed and on what terms. Democrats insist that if they controlled Congress, they would not reject out of hand granting President Bush that authority for the remaining 18 months of his term. But they will not agree to such an extension without changes to negotiating objectives that reflect long-held Democratic positions.
"Congress has been a secondary partner," says Rep. Sander Levin, D-Mich.

“I wouldn’t exclude it, but we would be emphatic about how it was shaped,” said Rep. Sander Levin, D-Mich. Democrats have criticized the “enforce your own labor laws” standard that is a part of the 2002 trade negotiating authority bill, and would seek an enforceable commitment that countries will improve their laws and practices to meet international core labor standards.
But Democrats say just as important as labor changes are efforts to strengthen requirements for the administration to consult with Congress as it negotiates trade agreements. Senate Democrats were stung last June when Bush administration trade officials ignored language approved unanimously by Senate Finance panel members that would have prohibited goods made with forced labor from benefiting from the U.S.-Oman trade agreement. U.S. trade officials said the language was not “necessary and appropriate” to implementing the agreement.
Democrats might pursue changes to seek earlier input on negotiating proposals in trade agreements, and scrap the Congressional Oversight Group, which has been criticized as superficial and ineffective. “Congress has been a secondary partner. COG meetings are perfunctory,” said Levin.
However, unless prospects brighten for restarting global negotiations in the Doha round, trade negotiating authority might be allowed to lapse, regardless of which party is in control of Congress. “If there isn’t any hope of [a Doha deal] by March, I think a lot of members from both parties will come in and say, what’s the point?” said William Reinsch, president of the National Foreign Trade Council.
The business community has already started talking about a short-term extension of current authority to give time for Doha talks to conclude, pointing toward 1993 when former President Clinton got a straight extension of fast-track as the Uruguay Round talks were wrapping up. But a straight extension of trade negotiating authority seems unlikely if Democrats retake the House or Senate. “The circumstances were very different in ’93,” said Viji Rangaswami, an associate at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace.
She noted that Congress in 1993 voted to extend a bill that had won broad, bipartisan support, while the 2002 trade negotiating authority squeaked through the House with the support of 25 Democrats. “The essential ingredient that allowed for a straight extension in 1993 is not present today,” she said.
A Democratic victory in the House or Senate would complicate the path for the U.S.-Peru free trade agreement, and a host of other Bush administration bilateral trade initiatives, but not necessarily forestall them. Democrats would likely insist on strengthened labor provisions in the Peru deal -- at least through an addendum to the agreement, if not through re-opening language that has already been negotiated. House Ways and Means ranking member Charles Rangel, D-N.Y., and Senate Finance ranking member Max Baucus, D-Mont., both have praised the administration’s launch of bilateral trade talks with South Korea, which are still in the early stages.
Cracking down on unfair trade practices would likely be a key area of Democratic focus, and Democrats would reach for stronger medicine than has been resorted to by the Republican Congress. A trade enforcement bill introduced by Ways and Means Democrats this year would allow U.S. industries to seek countervailing duties against imports from non-market economies such as China. That provision enjoys bipartisan support in the Senate, though not from Baucus and Senate Finance Chairman Grassley. The House Democratic bill also laid the legal basis for attacking Chinese currency manipulation through countervailing duties and limited the administration’s leeway in rejecting industry petitions for safeguard quotas against Chinese imports.