even though the pressure was immense to vote for the bill.
PNTR with China: Economic and political costs greatly outweigh benefits
Jeff Faux
April 1, 2000http://www.epi.org/publications/entry/briefingpapers_pntr_china/ "The Clinton Administration and the Republican congressional leadership are urging Congress to ratify the trade and investment pact the administration recently negotiated with China. The agreement is one of a series China is negotiating with members of the World Trade Organization (WTO) in order to join that body. Approval by Congress would, among other things, grant China Permanent Normal Trade Relations (PNTR) - thereby surrendering Congress' existing right to an annual review and renewal of the United States' trade relationship with China. In that event, the United States will give up the most important non-military leverage it has in its complex relationship with the authoritarian and unpredictable Chinese regime.
Congress must now judge whether the likely costs are justified by the likely benefits. As always, the burden of proof is on those who propose a change in policy. Supporters of the agreement have claimed that it will bring two types of benefits: economic benefits in the form of expanding jobs and income for Americans, and geopolitical benefits in the form of increased U.S. influence over China's internal development. An analysis of the costs and potential benefits in these areas indicates that the trade pact's supporters have not made their case..."There's something happening here...AFL-CIO issues page - this was very interesting!
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=1777600&mesg_id=1777600I came across this page when looking back on the votes for the China Trade bill in 2000. What is interesting is how the page includes information on the China Trade bill for certain candidates and excludes vote information for other candidates. I would assume this page is compiled for the benefit of their members so why would they be selective on the voting records of the candidates? Does anyone else find this strange?
http://kucinich.house.gov/Issues/Issue/?IssueID=1466#Other trade issues: Permanent MFN status for China
"...Furthermore, giving China permanent MFN will be harmful to the U.S. economy, since the record trade deficit with China (and attendant problems such as loss of U.S. jobs, and lower average wages in the U.S.) will worsen. For 2000, the trade deficit was nearly $84 billion. Now that China has been awarded permanent MFN and is close to WTO membership, the trade deficit will worsen. In a September 30, 1999 report, the U.S. International Trade Commission concluded that China's accession to the WTO would cause "an increase in the U.S. trade deficit with China".
Conclusion -- There was no legal requirement to award China permanent MFN. Permanent MFN will be a drag on the U.S. economy and has cost us the best leverage we have to promote justice in China and throughout the world."‘Made in China’ hazards began with ‘Made in Washington, D.C.’
Democratic Presidential candidate Kucinich charges http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=3716361&mesg_id=3716361WASHINGTON, D.C. – “Made in China” has become a health and safety warning label for American consumers following the recalls of tens of millions of Chinese-made toys, but the “real warning label should say ‘Made in Washington, D.C. by corporate lobbyists’ because the life-threatening hazards of these products were either ignored or brushed off by members of the Congress seven yeas ago,” Democratic Presidential candidate Dennis Kucinich said today..."