The Congressional Record is a unique source of public documentation. It started in 1873, documenting nearly all the major and minor policies being discussed and debated.
“EXPIRATION OF TRADE PROVISIONS” mentioning the U.S. Dept of Labor was published in the Senate section on pages S13932 on Dec. 20, 2001.
The publication is reproduced in full below:
EXPIRATION OF TRADE PROVISIONS
Mr. BAUCUS. Mr. President, in the whirlwind of activity that always accompanies the end of a legislative session, many critical legislative decisions are made and critical legislation passes. Often it takes some time to tote up the wins and losses and arrive at a final evaluation of what has been achieved and what remains to be done.
Despite the efforts of those in the Senate, one of the losses for the session is the expiration of three key trade programs, the Generalized System of Preferences (GSP), the Andean Trade Preferences Act (ATPA), and Trade Adjustment Assistance program.
What is surprising about the expiration of these programs is all three of them have nearly universal support. They expire not because of a legitimate difference in policies and not because the programs have served their purpose. They expire because of political maneuvering in the House.
In my view, it always reflects poorly on the Congress when needed programs expire due to political machinations or simply lack of attention. It sends poor signals to those that depend on these programs. In this case, the U.S. companies that import products under GSP and ATPA and the foreign countries we are attempting to aid through these programs can hardly avoid the impression that these programs are a low priority for Congress.
In the case of ATPA, there are those that believe that expiration will spur a rapid move to expand ATPA. I support an expansion of ATPA, but I believe such brinkmanship is far more likely to result in a long break in ATPA than it is a quick expansion.
Fortunately, in the case of both GSP and ATPA it is possible to extend these tariff benefits retroactively. If the U.S. importers are able to shift funds and wait, there is a good chance they will ultimately receive the promised benefits from these programs.
Sadly, this is not the case with the expiration of the Trade Adjustment Assistance program. This program provides income support and training benefits to workers who have lost their jobs due to trade. It provides them the opportunity to train for a new job and rebuild their lives. Given that they are unemployed, they are generally not in a position to absorb a three month or a six month break in benefits.
I understand that the Department of Labor plans to advise the state agencies that work with them to administer TAA plan to advise those agencies to keep paying benefits because they expect the program to be reauthorized. The Department of Labor's advise is sound; indeed, I hope to win passage for a considerable expansion of TAA.
Unfortunately, there is no guarantee that state agencies will keep operating based upon this federal promise and borrow money from other programs to support TAA. In fact, in at least 5 states, state law prohibits such fund shifting.
This raises the prospect that some of the 35,000 TAA recipients around the United States will receive a very nasty Christmas present--
the unexpected halt of the benefits on which they depend to rebuild their lives and support their families.
Mr. President, I believe Congress is sometimes criticized unfairly. Sometimes, however, the rush of events diverts attention from some of the glaring errors we make.
The stubborn obstinance of some of the other body to extend TAA is, in my view, a shameful example of playing politics with the interest of those citizens that can least afford it. I hope this example is not lost on journalists, editorial writers, and, ultimately, voters. Someone should be held accountable.
____________________
