Joe Sestak on Free Trade Democratic Senate Challenger; former Navy Admiral

Mistake to withdraw from TPP: creates opening for China

SESTAK: I believe we lost an important opportunity to shape the future of global trade when we withdrew our involvement from the Trans-Pacific Partnership. While that trade agreement was far from perfect, it gave us the chance to set the rules of engagement across a critically important region, within a framework that does not include China. Our withdrawal sent a worrying signal to our regional friends and allies. In the absence of US global leadership, China will inevitably fill the vacuum.

Would rejoin Trans-Pacific Partnership

Encourage export potential; rejoin "improved" TPP

On his website, Sestak says that he will re-join the Trans-Pacific Partnership "while improving the agreement to ensure that it serves our people, not merely our corporations."

Stop using tariffs as weapon in disputes with China

It is imperative that we be in a position to compete with China, our only major economic rival, for their business. China is rapidly pursuing economic expansion around the globe, but without the same standards for the environment, labor rights, and intellectual property enforcement that our societal norms and values rightly demand.

Re-join the Trans-Pacific Partnership

Supports Ex-Im Bank & supports trade agreements in principle

Sestak isn't taking a position yet on a pending trade agreement that the Obama administration argues will create job opportunities by boosting exports. Some Democrats have expressed skepticism that the deal with Japan and other Pacific countries will be beneficial to Pennsylvania.

Sestak said he wants to see the United States, not China, helping set trade guidelines in those countries--a position that Toomey also has outlined. "In principle, I'd like to be for it, because I want to set the rules of the road for trade," Sestaksaid. "Trade is part of our national security."

Supports TPP in principle, but verify openly before we trust

"But don't you trust Obama?" asked one citizen. "I'm a guy that verifies before he trusts," Sestak replied.

In an interview later, Sestak said some U.S. workers have been harmed by past trade deals, particularly those without a college degree. Better job-retraining programs should be put in place to help workers who might be hurt by the ripple effects of a trade agreement, along with tough requirements on labor practices and environmental standards for countries that sign the eventual deal.

Tax companies who fire US workers & import goods from China

Voted YES on promoting free trade with Peru.

• enforcement of textile and apparel rules of origin;
• certain textile and apparel safeguard measures; and
• enforcement of export laws governing trade of timber products from Peru.

Proponents support voting YES because:

Rep. RANGEL: It's absolutely ridiculous to believe that we can create jobs without trade. I had the opportunity to travel to Peru recently. I saw firsthand how important this agreement is to Peru and how this agreement will strengthen an important ally of ours in that region. Peru is resisting the efforts of Venezuela's authoritarian President Hugo Chavez to wage a war of words and ideas in Latin America against the US. Congress should acknowledge the support of the people of Peru and pass this legislation by a strong margin.

Opponents recommend voting NO because:

Rep. WU: I regret that I cannot vote for this bill tonight because it does not put human rights on an equal footing with environmental and labor protections.

Rep. KILDEE: All trade agreements suffer from the same fundamental flaw: They are not self-enforcing. Trade agreements depend upon vigorous enforcement, which requires official complaints be made when violations occur. I have no faith in President Bush to show any enthusiasm to enforce this agreement. Congress should not hand this administration yet another trade agreement because past agreements have been more efficient at exporting jobs than goods and services. I appeal to all Members of Congress to vote NO on this. But I appeal especially to my fellow Democrats not to turn their backs on those American workers who suffer from the export of their jobs. They want a paycheck, not an unemployment check.

Voted YES on assisting workers who lose jobs due to globalization.

Proponents support voting YES because:

Rep. RANGEL: In recent years, trade policy has been a dividing force. This legislation develops a new trade policy that more adequately addresses the growing perception that trade is not working for American workers. The Trade and Globalization Assistance Act would expand training and benefits for workers while also helping to encourage investment in communities that have lost jobs to increased trade--particularly in our manufacturing sector. The bill is a comprehensive policy expanding opportunities for American workers, industries, and communities to prepare for and overcome the challenges created by expanded trade.

Opponents recommend voting NO because:

Rep. McCRERY: We should be considering trade adjustment assistance in the context of trade opportunities generally for US workers. That is to say, I think we should be considering modifications to our assistance network in the context of the pending free trade agreements that are before the Congress. Unfortunately, we are not doing that. We are considering TAA in isolation. [We should instead] restructure TAA from a predominantly income support program into a job retraining program. Other problems include that H.R. 3920 would:

• pointlessly keep people in trade adjustment assistance longer.
• increase TAA spending by billions of dollars, but would not require any further accountability on how program funds are spent.
• greatly expand TAA and exacerbate the inefficiencies in the program today.
• extend benefits to public sector workers and submit State and local officials to subpoenas and legal proceedings to comply.

Tariffs against countries undervaluing their currency.

Amends the Tariff Act of 1930 to require the administering authority to determine, based on certain requirements, whether the exchange rate of the currency of an exporting country is undervalued or overvalued (misaligned) against the U.S. dollar for an 18-month period; and to take certain actions under a countervailing duty or antidumping duty proceeding to offset such misalignment in cases of an affirmative determination. Congress makes the following findings:
1. The strength, vitality, and stability of the US economy and the openness and effectiveness of the global trading system are critically dependent upon an international monetary regime of orderly and flexible exchange rates.
2. Increasingly in recent years, a number of foreign governments have undervalued their currencies by means of protracted, large-scale intervention in foreign exchange markets, and this fundamental misalignment has substantially contributed to distortions in trade flows.
3. This exchange depreciation serves as a subsidy for, and facilitates dumping of, exports from countries that engage in this mercantilist practice.
4. It is consistent with the agreements of the World Trade Organization and the International Monetary Fund that US trade law make explicit that fundamental undervaluation by an exporting country of its currency is actionable as a countervailable export subsidy and alternatively can be offset by antidumping duties.