Mr. Adams, for himself, Mr. Palafox, Mr. Martin, Mr. Garwood, Mr. Cole, Mr. Kiefer, and Mr. Frappier, presents


A BILL
To withdraw normal trade relations treatment from the products of the People's Republic of China.


Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. WITHDRAWAL OF NORMAL TRADE RELATIONS TREATMENT FROM THE PEOPLE'S REPUBLIC OF CHINA .

Notwithstanding the provisions of title I of Public Law 106-286, title IV of the Trade Act of 1974, or any other provision of law, effective on the date of the enactment of this Act, normal trade relations treatment shall not apply to the products of the People's Republic of China , and normal trade relations treatment may not thereafter be extended to the products of that country.

Madame Chair,
I assume that an author will be present at some point. 2 simple questions for me at this point as I do not wish to assume anything:

1) What is the motivation for this action?

2) What are the consequences as China is a rapidly emerging market?

I yield

Madame Chair,

Mr. Plawinski raises interesting points , I would have liked to see a findings section in here that states why this is needed, for how long it is to apply, and what we wish to see from China in order for us to restore trade relations.

Second, China is a rapidly expanding market, and I'd like the sponsors to present what they think the ramifications of this action will be on our economy.

Madame Chair,

The decision was made to draft this bill when other legislation was moving forward to extend sanctions on countries with human rights abuses. China is the largest known abuser of human rights, particularly in Tibet.

Stopping short of sanctions for any one country, I think China should not be given trade preferences that enrich their Communist regime and reward them for the intolerable record on human rights. This won't harm their economy or ours, I don't think, but it will cease giving them special trade deals other nations don't get.

China is a fast developing nation, and has a strong market to tap into, undoubtably, but we shouldn't be ignoring their record against their own citizens in the pursuit of the almighty dollar.

My other cosponsors may have other reasons for the bill, so please indulge in the other members if they choose to speak on this legislation.

Thank you for your time.

This post has been edited by gatoradams on Dec 3 2004, 11:51 AM

Madame Chairwoman,

I share the sentiments of the gentleman from Florida. We must send a message to China that we will no longer tolerate its human rights abuses.

I yield.

This post has been edited by Rapierman on Dec 3 2004, 12:07 PM

Madame Chair,
The motivation given by Mr Adams is as I would have suspected and hoped, based upon human rights, an area too often neglected and put aside in our history for the sake of economic considerations.

I have alwasy considered myslef a staunch supporter of this. In the case of China howvere my dilemma is that the chinese are emerging, modernizing etc at rate faster than I would have suspected.

The dilemma for me then is to pay homage and achieve change in their human rights policy, without at the same time losing ground floor economic opportunities.

Time is short on this, in a global-political sense. I am interested in how the other sponsors view this.

I yield

Madame Chairwoman,

My colleague has valid economic concerns. I'm just not sure our country should be making special deals so that we can convince our companies to invest there. I say let the markets run as they would with any other country and let the companies and consumers get the fair prices without any preferences.

This way weren't not rewarding them for their human rights record, but not putting sanctions or in any way punishing those who would do business with the Chinese.

Thank you again for listening.

Mr. Chair,

I agree with the gentleman from Florida. I co-sponsored this bill because I believe that our country should start being consistent on its policies. We went to war with Sadaam Hussein over similar human rights violations that were commited in China. In addition, we have an embargo on the Castro and Chavez regimes, both of which are certainly Communist regimes.

While China in many ways has a free-market economy, this does not excuse its Communist regime's behavior against its people as well as its rather questionable population control tactics.

Indeed, we cannot simply let China take advantage of us and make us look hypocritical to the rest of the world. I suggest that it's time we practice what we preach and that we respond to China's transgressions. This certainly may have an economic effect on our nation, but it would send a message to the rest of the world that the US is going to start acting in the interests of the global community.

I yield the floor.

Madame Chairwoman,

I move for unanimous consent to the bill.

Mr. Kieffer,

According to the AGS Rules of Order Article IX, Section Cb:

Though an admirable attempt, hold off until the bill hits the debate floor.