29 June 2001

Pro-Trade House Democrat Sees Uphill Fight for Trade Authority

(Dooley says Republican bill far short of needed votes)

By Bruce Odessey Washington File Staff Writer

Washington -- A pro-trade Democrat in the U.S. House of Representatives predicts a tough fight ahead to secure congressional passage of trade negotiating authority for President Bush.

Representative Cal Dooley of California said House Republican leaders would have to compromise to win support from enough moderate Republicans and Democrats to pass what is called trade promotion authority (TPA) or fast track.

In June 29 remarks to a Heritage Foundation program, Dooley guessed that only 150-180 Republicans are likely to support the House leadership TPA bill sponsored by Representative Phil Crane, chairman of the Ways and Means trade subcommittee.

The Crane bill omits any mention of labor and environmental issues, issues that are central to most Democrats and many moderate Republicans. By Dooley's count it would fall far short of getting the 218 votes needed to pass a bill in the 435-member House.

Republican leaders have been counting votes since the Crane bill was introduced weeks ago. That they have not announced the results suggests they remain desperately far from a majority, Dooley said.

"There's a message there," he said.

Under TPA, Congress restricts itself only to approve or reject a negotiated trade agreement, within strict time limits and without amendments. The previous grant expired early in 1994. Since then attempts to reauthorize TPA have failed over labor and environmental issues.

When Congress returns from recess July 9, Dooley said, House Republican leaders face a crucial decision about whether to push their bill through Crane's subcommittee or delay until a bill that could win broader support is fashioned.

Dooley said his group of Democrats is pressing other senior Democrats on Ways and Means -- Representatives Charles Rangel and Sander Levin -- to submit in early July the version of TPA legislation they have been crafting.

If a Rangel-Levin bill failed to win bipartisan support, Dooley said, he might attempt to produce a compromise package himself. His view was that TPA should elevate labor and environmental trade negotiating objectives to the same level as those for agriculture, services, intellectual property rights and other commercial objectives.

He said TPA should give the president a variety of tools to enforce foreign compliance with any trade agreement reached in negotiations. Among those tools, he said, TPA should neither mandate nor exclude trade sanctions.

Dooley said he doubted many House Republicans who opposed TPA in the past would support it now just because the president who wants it now is Republican.

Dooley cited some disturbing recent developments in the House for TPA prospects. The 285-143 House vote June 26 to block broader access to Mexican trucks on U.S. highways included support from 82 Republicans, four of them committee chairmen.

Dooley also mentioned the withdrawal of support for TPA by Representative Larry Combest, Republican chairman of the Agriculture Committee. He indicated that support from economically distressed farm districts for trade negotiating authority has generally weakened; those districts lent crucial support in past attempts to pass TPA.

On the Senate side, Dooley said, he hoped Democrat Max Baucus, the new chairman of the Finance Committee, would submit his version of a TPA bill in July also. Baucus has insisted on strong labor and environmental language as well as protection of existing U.S. antidumping and other trade remedy laws.

A bill with compromise language introduced by Senator Bob Graham, a Democrat, and Senator Frank Murkowski, a Republican, won praise from the Bush administration but criticism from Baucus that its labor, environment and trade law provisions were too weak to get sufficient support for passage.

Baucus has said he wants the Bush administration to provide more information about their positions on labor and environment issues before he proceeds. He has also said the Senate might not consider TPA at all in 2001.

"No bill is better than a bad bill," Baucus told reporters June 26.

Following Dooley at the Heritage Foundation program June 29, U.S. Trade Representative Robert Zoellick argued forcefully, however, that Congress needs to move toward passing TPA quickly.

"This is not an abstract debate on trade policy," Zoellick said. "I'm at the table now -- every day -- negotiating with countries from around the world. They have the full authority to negotiate for their nations' interest. I need it too. So now it is time. Not next year. Not later this year. But now."