THE VIRGINIAN-PILOT
Copyright (c) 1994, Landmark Communications, Inc.
DATE: Monday, December 5, 1994 TAG: 9412050017
SECTION: FRONT PAGE: A7 EDITION: FINAL
DATELINE: WASHINGTON LENGTH: Long : 102 lines
Here's how area members of Congress were recorded on major roll call votes in the week ending Friday.
GATT: In a 288-146 vote, the House passed a bill (HR 5110) to include the United States in the GATT global free-trade pact.
The Senate followed suit, clearing the way for the United States join more than 100 countries in an expanded General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade scheduled to take effect in July.
GATT will stimulate global commerce by requiring nations to cut their tariffs, or taxes on imports, by more than one-third, and by forcing down the subsidies that governments use to protect favored industries.
The bill includes a variety of revenue measures to offset the estimated $12 billion that GATT will cost the Treasury in lost tariff revenue over five years.
GATT establishes a World Trade Organization to enforce the new rules for international commerce.
Critics said the WTO will chip away at United States sovereignty, for example, by judging environmental and safety laws to be unfair protection against imports.
But supporters said that GATT imperils only laws specifically written to keep out imports, and that the WTO cannot infringe upon federal or state statutes.
Supporter Bill Archer, R-Texas, said, ``The history of this century teaches that free trade is the most effective public policy tool that we have to increase prosperity in our society. . . . Our economic future is closely linked to the tearing down of export barriers and to locking in these extraordinary reforms.
``With 94 percent of the world's consumers living beyond the U.S. borders, the global economy is here to stay.''
Opponent Sherrod Brown, D-Ohio, said, ``Every time we pass a trade bill in this body, every time we worship at the altar of free trade, every time we reconvert to the religion of free trade, our nation falls deeper and deeper into job-killing trade deficits. . . . The free-trade fundamentalists are telling the American people to act as if there is no such thing as cheap labor overseas.
``Do we really believe that low wages and Third World countries do not pose a threat to American jobs?''
A yes vote was to approve GATT.
Herbert H. Bateman, R-Va.Yes
Owen B. Pickett, D-Va.Yes
Robert C. Scott, D-Va.Yes
Norman Sisisky, D-Va.No
Eva Clayton, D-N.C. Yes
H. Martin Lancaster, D-N.C. Yes
Senate
GATT: In a 76-24 vote, the Senate gave final congressional approval to a bill (HR 5110, above) including the United States in the international anti-protectionist trade pact known as GATT.
Majority Leader George Mitchell, D-Maine, said: ``This historic agreement is essential to our economic future. It will open foreign markets to American goods and services. It will reduce protectionist foreign trade barriers. It will protect the intellectual property rights of American individuals and enterprises. It will expand export opportunities for our agricultural products.''
Opponent Byron Dorgan, D-N.D., said, ``I am for expanded trade, but that must be accompanied by a fresh, new admission price to our marketplaces. That admission price should say we will trade with anybody as long as they pay a living wage, have working conditions that are fair and safe, and are not fouling the world's air and the water . . . that you must pay a living wage and play by the rules.''
A yes vote was to approve GATT.
John W. Warner, R-Va.Yes
Charles S. Robb, D-Va.Yes
Jesse A. Helms, R-N.C.No
Lauch Faircloth, R-N.C.Yes
Budget waiver: With a 68-32 vote, the Senate achieved the three-fifths majority required for waiving pay-as-you-go budget rules to accommodate GATT legislation (HR 5110). The waiver was needed because the trade pact is projected to increase national debt by $15 billion to $30 billion over 10 years. However, supporters of GATT say that projection ignores increased tax revenues that the agreement will generate.
Supporter Bill Bradley, D-N.J., said, ``A vote against the agreement on a budget point of order is, in fact, a vote against budget stringency (because) if this agreement is killed for narrow technical reasons, we will pay with less growth, fewer jobs, and as a result, a higher budget deficit.''
Opponent Conrad Burns, R-Mont., said GATT ``has been called a tax cut for consumers. That is banking on retailers to cut prices to reflect the drop in tariffs. Short of that, it is a loss of revenue and an attempt to break the budget, putting American taxpayers on the short end of the stick.''
A yes vote was to waive pay-as-you-go budget rules and move to final approval of the GATT bill.
Warner Yes
Robb Yes
Helms No
Faircloth No MEMO: Copyright 1994, Thomas Reports Inc.
by CNB