The formal implementing legislation for the U.S.-Peru Trade Promotion Agreement (free trade agreement) was introduced in the U.S. House of Representatives late last Thursday evening, September 27. (Members may recall that under “trade promotion authority” procedures, a free trade agreement is reviewed by the Congress through a vote on the implementing legislation, not the text of the agreement itself; if the implementing legislation is not approved, the agreement does not go into effect). This formal introduction comes on the heels of an 18 to 3 favorable vote in a “mock mark-up” of proposed legislation in the House Ways and Means Committee two weeks ago, and a favorable vote by “unanimous consent” in the Senate Finance Committee earlier last week. The formal introduction of the implementing legislation starts a legislative clock for consideration of this measure – that is, the House Ways and Means now has 45 legislative days to report (approve) the legislation, and the full House must vote within 15 legislative days after.
In light of the strong bipartisan vote in the Ways and Means Committee in support of the Peru agreement just two weeks ago, it would appear that the formal legislation would likewise be approved and reported to the full House with relative ease. However, there are two concerns that we need to watch. First, a group of Democrats, led by some freshman Members, are mounting efforts to rally opposition to the agreement, and at least convince a majority of their own party to cast their vote against the accord. Second, in order to assuage Democratic Members who are concerned that their first “trade” vote in this 110th Congress would be on a free trade agreement – as opposed to, for example, a bill that addresses the ever-increasing bilateral trade imbalance with China – House Speaker Nancy Pelosi pronounced at the end of last week that she will first bring to the House floor a bill to extend and expand the Trade Adjustment Assistance (TAA) program. Although it is certainly possible for the House to consider a TAA extension and then turn its attention to the Peru bill way before the legislative clock begins to dwindle, the Speaker’s position does inject a “timing” wrinkle that could endanger the pending agreement.
Related to these issues, we have been personally approached by staff of the House Ways and Means Committee to collect from the Association’s members a series of "short stories" on why a Peru Trade Promotion Agreement is important to them, and how they would benefit from this agreement. The “short stories” do not need to be any longer than 2 or 3 sentences; the aim would be to collect three or four of these ‘short stories,” and list them on a one-pager submitted on behalf of AFI. This “one-pager” would then become an intrinsic part of the staffers’ final push for approval within the Committee, and to members beyond the Committee.
This would be an excellent opportunity for AFI to once again lend critical support in the final stages of a free trade agreement process, and the comments submitted will be widely disseminated to Members and staff on Capitol Hill. Again, nothing extensive is required here – just two or three sentences on why approval of the agreement is important to your company.
Please pass these “short stories” along to Bob Bauer or myself by this Thursday, October 4, so that we can collate and format the one-pager for submission by Friday.
In the meantime, we will press the cause and keep members advised.
