| Speaker | Time | Text |
|---|---|---|
|
Jameson Greer Nomination
00:07:30
|
||
|
unidentified
|
Funded by these television companies and more, including MIDCO. | |
| Where are you going? | ||
| Or maybe a better question is, how far do you want to go? | ||
| And how fast do you want to get there? | ||
|
unidentified
|
Now we're getting somewhere. | |
| So let's go. | ||
| Let's go faster. | ||
| Let's go further. | ||
| Let's go beyond. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Midco supports C-SPAN as a public service, along with these other television providers, giving you a front-row seat to democracy. | |
| Up next, Jameson Greer, President Trump's nominee to serve as U.S. Trade Representative. | ||
| He testified at his confirmation hearing before the Senate Finance Committee, taking questions on how he would handle tariff policy amid the President's plan to impose tariffs on allies and adversaries alike. | ||
| Mr. Greer served as chief of staff to former U.S. Trade Representative Robert Lighthizer from 2017 to 2020 during the first Trump administration. | ||
| The committee will return to order. | ||
| Senator Wyden and I will give our introductory statements, and then we will go to a good friend and colleague, Senator Haggerty, and then we will go ahead with our testimony, Mr. Greer, for your hearing. | ||
| Mr. Greer, I would welcome you and congratulate you on your nomination. | ||
| By traditional timelines, this is one of the earliest dates the Finance Committee has held a nomination hearing for the USTR. | ||
| Your cooperation and timely responses to questions from both sides of the aisle expedited the committee's very demanding process. | ||
| Mr. Greer is nominated by the President for an incredibly important job, America's chief trade negotiator. | ||
| By statute, and frankly, in accordance with our Constitution, our negotiator must report to Congress, which means he reports to the Finance Committee. | ||
| This week, attention fell on President Trump's executive orders to help secure our borders from illegal immigration and fentanyl smuggling. | ||
| I strongly support securing our borders and fighting fentanyl trafficking. | ||
| The executive orders rely on International Emergency Economic Powers Act, or IEPA, and concern drug policy and border security. | ||
| The President, not the USTR, invokes IEPA. | ||
| And the Department of Homeland Security, not the USTR, is responsible for securing our borders. | ||
| Nonetheless, I am securing briefings on these orders, and in fact, Customs and Border Protection will brief the committee on this matter today. | ||
| What the President has done that is different, though, is to bring tariffs into the discussion about border security. | ||
| USTR is, as I said, America's chief trade negotiator. | ||
| Anytime the U.S. government is considering tariffs or something that implicates trade policy, he, the USTR, should be a part of those conversations and should report to us about those conversations and solicit our input. | ||
| Right now, Mr. Greer is not in the government and not privy to various discussions. | ||
| Confirming him will allow him to be a part of those conversations and to work with this committee, ensuring that Congress fulfills its constitutional responsibilities over international trade. | ||
| When we look at whether Jamison Greer will be a good negotiator for America's trade interests and a partner to this committee, his experience and skill set indicate the answer is yes. | ||
| He understands the USTR's policymaking since he served as its chief of staff. | ||
| At USTR, he distinguished himself as an effective negotiator in his work on the U.S.-Mexico-Canada Agreement, or USMCA, which overwhelmingly passed Congress. | ||
| As many of my Democrat colleagues know firsthand, he worked closely with them on their priorities for USMCA. | ||
| As an accomplished international trade attorney, he is an expert on our trade agreements and trade laws, including the requirements to report to Congress promptly and thoroughly. | ||
| We need an effective USTR now more than ever. | ||
| Frankly, our last USTR did not negotiate any agreements, and we lost ground to foreign competitors. | ||
| The Biden administration walked away even from its own limited initiatives, such as the Indo-Pacific Economic Framework. | ||
| Rather than forge new rules to combat China's trade practices, the prior administration turned its back on existing rules and positions, such as our intellectual property rights under the WTO TRIPS agreement and support for open data flows and non-discrimination against our technology companies. | ||
| The Biden administration also dawdled on enforcement of our existing trade agreements, including by failing to act against protectionist measures on our U.S. agriculture and energy producers. | ||
| Finally, there was one other major USTR failure during the last administration: failing to report to and consult with this committee. | ||
| Both sides of the aisle expressed serious concern about the last USTR's repeated failures to consult with this committee and her position that she did not need to improve the consultation with the committee or the agency's transparency with the public. | ||
| We should not hold Mr. Greer responsible for those failings. | ||
| Mr. Greer has been crystal clear that he will consult with this committee and respect Congress's constitutional prerogatives over trade. | ||
| I expect that some members may disagree from time to time with our administration, but if so, Mr. Greer has committed to make its case before us rather than ignore us. | ||
| If confirmed, I will hold him to that commitment. | ||
| Mr. Greer, thank you for your willingness to serve, and I look forward to hearing more from you about your perspectives on international trade and how you plan to work with this committee to achieve our shared priorities. | ||
| With that, I recognize Senator Wyden. | ||
| Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman, and Mr. Chairman and colleagues. | ||
| This has always been an area we've tried to find common ground, and it will be a challenge now, but that has always been the history of the Finance Committee. | ||
|
Foreigners Picking Up Tariff Bill
00:07:17
|
||
| Now, it may be something of a journalistic first, colleagues, but I would like to enter into the record three Wall Street Journal opinion articles on the trade issue. | ||
| One is entitled, The Dumbest Trade War in History. | ||
| A second is called, Pray for Surrender in Trump's Dumb Trade War. | ||
| And the third article is entitled, Trump Blinks on North American Tariffs. | ||
| Now, America has had its first taste of Trump's rancid trade policy this week. | ||
| Here, colleagues, are the receipts that demonstrate how much damage these flawed trade policies that we have seen thus far are doing. | ||
| They're hurting regular people. | ||
| We saw the effects on Wall Street. | ||
| I could go on. | ||
| One of the central problems, and I find it sad to say this, is that Donald Trump has repeatedly lied to the American people about who's going to pay these tariffs. | ||
| For a full year, you heard again and again and again, it was going to be these foreigners. | ||
| The foreigners were going to pick up the bill. | ||
| And that's just wrong. | ||
| And that's just terrible economics. | ||
| And that's not right to say that to working people and small businesses and others because they're the ones who pick up the bills. | ||
| Now, who could have seen these developments? | ||
| I thought it was coming because Donald Trump governs by whim, and in trade, that hurts American families. | ||
| His tariff bluff created huge uncertainty that is costing American businesses and putting the global economy on what I would describe as a month-to-month lease. | ||
| And frankly, my top priority today is to figure out who in hell in the Trump administration is going to be in charge of trade, what they plan to do, and how this sort of bedlam is going to get straightened out and we get some help for American families. | ||
| This weekend featured a bunch of fake promises, starting with the Trump threats to slap huge blanket tariffs on products from Canada, Mexico, and China. | ||
| Then Donald Trump backed down after Canada and Mexico repackaged some stale border security promises into a new box. | ||
| Foreign leaders around the world were laughing at us, colleagues, and the President really got rolled. | ||
| So this brings us to the business before the committee today, considering the nomination of Jamison Greer to serve as U.S. Trade Representative. | ||
| He and I met first when he worked with Bob Lighthizer. | ||
| He served as an attorney at several notable firms and was Bob Lighthizer's chief of staff. | ||
| I appreciated the meeting that we had a couple of days ago, and particularly your straightforward commitment to tell me what's going on with trade before I read it online or in some other publication. | ||
| And I asked for that, and I appreciate getting it, because every one of my colleagues will be asking me that. | ||
| And I venture that Senator Crapo may get the same kind of question. | ||
| The committee can't function if it's kept in the dark like it was over the past week. | ||
| So I expect that you'll pick up the phone and call us when trade is on the agenda in this administration. | ||
| And when you speak to me, you will be speaking to my colleagues on this side of the dais. | ||
| In our conversation, I was trying to figure out the trade chaos that occurred over the past weekend. | ||
| Now, I thought it was actually about trade. | ||
| My constituents in Oregon thought it was about trade. | ||
| They call up, Ron, one out of three jobs in Oregon depends on trade. | ||
| What's going on this weekend? | ||
| But you told me that the tariff threats were not actually about trade at all, but it was rather an issue of border security. | ||
| So I'm interested in exploring which is which, and I didn't leave that conversation we had very confident that you would expect to be in the room when these kinds of trade decisions are being made. | ||
| And this is something that ought to concern every member of this committee on both sides of the aisle. | ||
| The American people need to know who's making the trade case for them. | ||
| What we say in Oregon, this is all about value-added jobs. | ||
| You grow stuff in Oregon, you make stuff in Oregon, you add value to it, and you ship it around the world because Oregon products are very appealing around the world. | ||
| But you've got to know who's making the case. | ||
| Now, the law says USTR is in charge of international trade. | ||
| In this administration so far, it's not at all clear that's the case. | ||
| Is it Mr. Lutnick at the Commerce Department, Treasury Secretary Besant, Homeland Security who is it? | ||
| The finance committee needs a USTR who doesn't pass the buck, who speaks with the authority on the administration's trade policy. | ||
| And I'll close with this. | ||
| I want to make sure that we get the nominees' views when it comes to using tariffs to settle scores that don't have anything to do with trade. | ||
| For example, no administration has used the International Emergency Economic Powers Act to impose tariffs before Donald Trump. | ||
| It's my view that's an abuse of the law, and a number of us have already introduced legislation to rein it in. | ||
| If the USTR has no role in decisions like that, I'm not even sure what their job is. | ||
| International trade policy is just too important to American families, workers, small businesses, manufacturers, and farmers to be sacrificed to make headlines on unrelated issues. | ||
| We will not have a full-scale CRAPO-Wyden scrum with respect to potatoes in Oregon and Idaho because we love them both and we know Oregons are superior. | ||
| And we need to sell these products in foreign markets. | ||
| And that's not about going back and forth over whose products are better. | ||
| It's my hope that the committee will be spending more time on making it easier to sell made in the USA products and less time figuring out why this administration is putting, as we saw last week, last weekend, Americans' livelihoods at risk. | ||
| Mr. Greer, I don't envy your position. | ||
| My friend Senator Haggerty, he and I have talked about trade. | ||
| I don't envy your challenge because based on last week, it is unclear how these decisions are going to be made, what the influence is going to be of Mr. Greer, and what Senator Haggerty, who has longtime interest in this, is going to be doing as well. | ||
|
Introducing Jamison Greer
00:03:25
|
||
| So this is an opportunity for you all to make a case for how you're going to pass trade measures that are really going to make sense for the American people at a crucial time. | ||
| Thank you, Mr. Chairman. | ||
| Thank you, Senator Wyden. | ||
| And today we are honored to have our good friend and colleague from the volunteer state, Senator Haggerty, here to introduce Jamison Greer. | ||
| Senator Haggerty, you may proceed. | ||
| Thank you, Chairman Crapo, Ranking Member Wyden. | ||
| It's a privilege to be here today, particularly a privilege to introduce my friend Jamison Greer to be President Trump's, our nation's trade representative. | ||
| Trade policy is a cornerstone of President Trump's economic plan for America. | ||
| For such a vital role, the President would only select a man whom he deeply trusts. | ||
| And thus, I believe his selection of Jameson speaks volumes about the qualifications and character of this nominee who will be testifying before the committee today. | ||
| Jameson is no stranger to the complexities of global trade. | ||
| He previously served as chief of staff to the U.S. Trade Representative, Ambassador Robert Lighthiser. | ||
| During his service at USTR, he participated in virtually every major trade action initiated by the administration. | ||
| He worked closely with senior officials across departments and agencies and was deeply involved in negotiations in the Phase I trade deal with China and the new United States-Mexico-Canada agreement. | ||
| I also had the pleasure of working with Jamison and Ambassador Lighthizer to help President Trump negotiate key trade deals between the United States and Japan, where Jameson proved himself exceptionally capable of representing America's interests on the global stage. | ||
| And Mr. Greer was in the room at every critical turn as we negotiated on America's behalf. | ||
| During President Trump's first term, we witnessed firsthand how strong trade policies and strong economic growth go hand in hand. | ||
| Tariffs were leveraged to advance America's strategic interests, hold our adversaries accountable, and bolster our national security. | ||
| All while Americans enjoy low inflation and economic prosperity. | ||
| Jameson understands this better than anyone, and I know he will bring that knowledge and experience to this role. | ||
| Jameson's approach is guided by a commitment to fair and reciprocal trade. | ||
| He understands that the United States is the world's largest market and that foreign access to this market should not be taken for granted. | ||
| He's consistently fought for the interests of key U.S. industries on the world stage. | ||
| As an officer in the Air Force JAG Corps, Jameson deployed to Iraq, where he advised on legal matters for U.S. airmen. | ||
| Public service is in his DNA. | ||
| I have great confidence in his capability and capacity to defend and rebuild our industries and his resolve to stand up for the working men and women of our nation. | ||
| President Trump is on a mission to usher in America's economic golden age, and he needs a capable team to get the job done. | ||
| Jameson has answered the call of duty before, and I thank him for his willingness to answer that call once again. | ||
| He's the right man for this job. | ||
| I look forward to his testimony and working with my colleagues to quickly advance Mr. Greer's nomination. | ||
|
Thankful Nomination Hearing
00:03:38
|
||
| Thank you. | ||
| Thank you, Senator Haggerty. | ||
| We appreciate your joining us for the introduction. | ||
| As is our custom, you're excused if you would like to get on with your schedule, and we will proceed. | ||
| Mr. Greer, before we have you begin with your opening statement, I have four questions which we ask all nominees before this committee. | ||
| First, is there anything that you are aware of in your background that might present a conflict of interest with the duties of the office to which you've been nominated? | ||
| No. | ||
| Second, do you know of any reason, personal or otherwise, that would in any way prevent you from fully and honorably discharging the responsibilities of the office to which you've been nominated? | ||
| No. | ||
| Third, do you agree without reservation to respond to any reasonable summons to appear and testify before any duly constituted committee of Congress if you are confirmed? | ||
| Yes. | ||
| And finally, do you commit to provide a prompt response in writing to any questions addressed to you by any senator of this committee? | ||
| Yes, I do. | ||
| Thank you. | ||
| And with that, you are welcome to make your opening statement. | ||
| Thank you, Chairman Crapo, Ranking Member Wyden, and members of the committee. | ||
| Thank you for taking the time today for this hearing. | ||
| It's an honor to be before the committee for consideration for this position. | ||
| I'm also very grateful to the committee staff for their hard work during this process. | ||
| It's been a very busy nomination season, and I know it couldn't happen without the staff, so thank you. | ||
| I'm grateful to President Trump for nominating me to be the United States Trade Representative. | ||
| His first term was historic and largely bipartisan with respect to reorienting U.S. trade policy. | ||
| And if I'm confirmed to this position, I look forward to continuing that work for the President and the American people in close consultation with this committee and the rest of Congress. | ||
| I also want to express my appreciation to my family, some of whom are here today. | ||
| I'm grateful to my parents, Michael and Shannon Greer, my siblings, and my extended family. | ||
| I'm particularly thankful for my wife, Marlow, and our five children, Noel, Pearl, Eve, Jameson, and Sonora. | ||
| Through various turns in public service, they have also sacrificed quite a bit, including during my military trainings, deployment to Iraq, and my prior White House service. | ||
| And I would be remiss not to acknowledge Ambassador Bob Lighthizer, who's already been mentioned several times today, and rightly so, a former U.S. Trade Representative and a gracious mentor and friend of many years. | ||
| He gave me my first job in Washington out of the military, and he brought me into the first Trump administration to be his chief of staff. | ||
| When he asked me to do that, I said, what is that? | ||
| He said, just it'll be fine. | ||
| Just come. | ||
| And it was fine. | ||
| It was wonderful. | ||
| And I wouldn't be prepared for this position without him and the many generous colleagues that have taught me over the years. | ||
| And I'm thankful to Senator Hagerty for his kind introduction. | ||
| Working with him when he was the U.S. Ambassador to Japan was a highlight of my professional life. | ||
| And he was exactly what an ambassador should be in terms of representing our country's interests while building constructive relationships with our trading partners. | ||
| I should also note that my great-great-grandfather Greer was born in Tennessee, as were many ancestors before that, so I'm an honorary constituent. | ||
| And you may not believe this, but the town where my ancestors were from is actually named Trade, Tennessee. | ||
|
Promoting American Dominance Through Trade
00:08:41
|
||
| So maybe it's destiny that I'm here today. | ||
| Again, I'm grateful to be considered for this position, and I look forward to building on the historic work that was accomplished on trade in President Trump's first term. | ||
| Notably, nearly all of that good work was kept in place by the Biden administration and even expanded upon. | ||
| For example, President Biden kept President Trump tariffs on China and increased them in a handful of critical areas, such as vehicles, steel, and semiconductors. | ||
| The last administration also embraced the United States-Mexico-Canada agreement negotiated by President Trump, which has driven massive investment in the auto industry in the United States and North America generally. | ||
| And to this day, I hear from cattle ranchers and other meat producers about how important it was to secure agricultural market access in Japan as part of the United States-Japan Phase I trade agreement. | ||
| And at the time President Trump was implementing his trade agenda, inflation and unemployment went down while real median household income went up for all demographics. | ||
| And this is the type of growth we want in America. | ||
| And I strongly believe that an active and pragmatic trade policy is critical to achieving this once again. | ||
| During my meetings on Capitol Hill in the lead up to this hearing, one senator asked me a simple but important question. | ||
| Why do you want this position? | ||
| There are many answers to this, but I have two primary reasons. | ||
| First, it is my belief that America should be a country of producers. | ||
| We are more than just what we consume. | ||
| Americans should have the opportunity to work in good-paying jobs, producing goods and services they can sell in this market and abroad to earn an honest living. | ||
| I grew up in a loving family of very modest means in the mountains of Northern California. | ||
| Our family lived in a mobile home, and my parents, excuse me, my parents regularly worked several jobs to help make ends meet, and the children helped. | ||
| So I'm very mindful of the struggles that Americans face when they're cut out of economic growth, and trade plays a role in those concerns. | ||
| But I'm convinced that American workers, farmers, ranchers, and service providers can compete with anyone else in the world in this market and beyond so long as they have a level playing field to do so. | ||
| Ensuring that Americans from all walks of life have dignified work as producers and builders is critical for economic mobility and social cohesion. | ||
| So if I am confirmed to this position, I would seek to develop and implement trade policies that incentivize good-paying jobs for American workers and allow them to support their families and communities. | ||
| And second, it is critical for our economic and national security that our supply chains are resilient. | ||
| We need resilience in strategic goods and services, agricultural and food supply chains, and technology. | ||
| We continue to live in a period of global volatility, unrest, and conflict as foreign adversaries invade other countries, build up their nuclear arsenals, and seek to overtake America's technological edge. | ||
| If the United States does not have a robust manufacturing base and innovation economy, it will have little in the way of hard power to deter conflict and protect Americans. | ||
| Trade policy can play an important role in ensuring that we have the economic security that leads to strong national security. | ||
| I am convinced that we have a relatively short window of time to restructure the international trading system to better serve U.S. interests. | ||
| If I'm fortunate enough to be confirmed of this position, I intend to work closely with this committee and the rest of Congress to execute President Trump's trade agenda. | ||
| Together, we can ensure that international trade benefits American workers and their families and promotes our military, economic, and technological dominance over the long term. | ||
| Thank you again for your time, and I look forward to our conversation today. | ||
| Thank you very much, Mr. Greer. | ||
| I'll start out with my questions. | ||
| First, in the agriculture zone, agriculture is important to many committee members and members of the Senate as a whole. | ||
| And notwithstanding Senator Wyden's and my friendly discussion about potatoes regularly, Idaho's 24,000 farms and ranches produce 185 commodities, and Idaho leads the nation in potato, barley, and hay production, and is the third largest producer of milk and cheese. | ||
| We've not opened up any new markets for our farmers in the last four years. | ||
| Farmers are also concerned that they may become the target of retaliation if we use tariffs to pressure other countries to change their ways. | ||
| How will you support the interests of America's farmers and ranchers once you're confirmed as our nation's chief trade negotiator? | ||
| Thank you, Chairman Crapo, for those questions. | ||
| Agriculture is something that is near and dear to my heart. | ||
| I was raised in Northern California, and that's rice country and almond country. | ||
| I'm very familiar as well with the Northwest and Mountain West and the important agricultural crops that you have. | ||
| In my view, American agricultural producers are the most competitive in the world, and they need to have markets commensurate with that competitiveness. | ||
| And to me, that means that we need to go and gain market access where things have been closed until now. | ||
| For many decades, we have had a trading system where the United States opens its market over and over again and others do not. | ||
| In India, for example, their average bound tariff rate on agricultural products is 39 percent. | ||
| In Turkey, it's 39.8 percent. | ||
| These are markets where they need to open to the United States, and I think we need to use all the tools at our disposal to do so. | ||
| Thank you very much. | ||
| And let's move to digital trade. | ||
| We lost ground during the last administration because we turned our back on digital trade rules, including promoting data flows, combating forced technology transfer, and promoting non-discrimination. | ||
| A number of jurisdictions, including the European Union and South Korea, utilize that opportunity to advance measures that target U.S. technology companies with special requirements or taxes while exempting their domestic companies or even Chinese companies. | ||
| Do you agree that ensuring U.S. technological leadership means that we need to confront these types of measures? | ||
| Yes, Chairman. | ||
| I strongly believe that we need to do that. | ||
| Again, this is an area where the United States is very competitive. | ||
| And I understand that we are having a domestic conversation about how to regulate digital trade and technology companies, et cetera. | ||
| And my view is that is where the conversation should be happening. | ||
| We should not be outsourcing our regulation to the European Union or Brazil or anyone else, and they can't discriminate against us, and it won't be tolerated. | ||
| Thank you, and I appreciate that perspective. | ||
| Next, the law states that the USTR reports directly to the President and Congress. | ||
| Though my colleagues and I may disagree on policy occasionally, we are united in defending this committee's jurisdiction. | ||
| If confirmed, do you commit to provide timely and thorough briefings on trade negotiations and to share proposals with this committee in advance of sharing them with foreign governments? | ||
| Chairman Crapo, we certainly expect to follow the law to the T with respect to consultations with Congress. | ||
| I agree with you exactly that the statute directs me to report directly to the President and to you. | ||
| And that includes all of these consultation requirements, including before we approach foreign governments with serious offers, that we need to come to you and talk about it so we can be on the same page. | ||
| Thank you. | ||
| And will you also keep us apprised and consider your input with our input with respect to USTR-led investigations and reports in the January 20 America First Trade Policy Memorandum? | ||
| Yes. | ||
| And then finally, with regard to trade reporting on trade barriers, by law, the USTR is required to issue an annual report called the National Trade Estimate that identifies foreign barriers of U.S. exports of goods and service or services. | ||
| The last administration decided it would not list a barrier if the administration agreed with the foreign government's ideology for enacting the barrier in the first place. | ||
| If confirmed, this year's national trade estimate may be one of the very first things you review. | ||
| Do you agree that the USTR reports should, as statutorily required, identify the full range of discriminatory barriers to U.S. trade, regardless of what agenda or excuse our trading partners may offer? | ||
| I agree with that, Chairman. | ||
| Thank you very much. | ||
| Senator Wyden. | ||
| Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman, and welcome, Mr. Greer. | ||
|
Trump's Trade Approach
00:15:04
|
||
| Let's talk first about the President's campaign pledges to lower prices. | ||
| For example, two weeks in, eggs are nearly $9 at grocery outlet in Portland. | ||
| And the President actually admitted when asked questions about this, there would be, in his words, not mine, pain involved. | ||
| So what I want to do is figure out how we're going to help the consumers and minimize the pain that they and our businesses are going to have. | ||
| And my view is that a smart approach in trade is to dig in in a targeted kind of way. | ||
| For example, if you're going to go after trade cheats, that makes sense to me. | ||
| Taking steps to minimize the pain and cost to American families makes sense to me. | ||
| That's not the Trump approach. | ||
| The Trump approach is to apply universal tariffs, cross-the-board tariffs. | ||
| And I think that's a prescription for hitting our citizens, small businesses and individuals, really hard and also raising inflationary pressures. | ||
| So I thought I'd start by asking you, can Can you give us an example that other than Smoot Hawley in the country's history where there were universal tariff hikes and where somehow the country benefited? | ||
| Where are the examples that you cite for this Trump approach in American history? | ||
| Senator Wyden, thank you for that question. | ||
| And I think it's indeed instructive to think about our history with respect to trade policy. | ||
| As many on this committee likely realize, until about 1913, the United States government was entirely funded, almost entirely funded, from tariff revenues, including during the latter part of the 19th century when America truly was exploding as an international industrial powerhouse. | ||
| And we had a relatively high tariff rate. | ||
| At the same time, we saw countries like the United Kingdom lowering their tariff rates and actually falling out of industrial competitiveness. | ||
| I would say also you have instances in the past where we have seen what happens when the reverse happens. | ||
| For example, when we gave China permanent market access to the United States. | ||
| But what I'm asking about is an example for the idea that the President has made number one on the trade policy list, a universal tariff. | ||
| I like a toolbox. | ||
| I'm prepared to put a tariff in there, and there are instances where it's valuable. | ||
| But I'd like to see some kind of lodestar here that shows us why we ought to go in the direction the president is going, because I haven't seen one. | ||
| Certainly. | ||
| Well, when you look at the trade policy memo that the administration released, they have a part about fair and balanced trade, and in part of that, they discuss what you've mentioned, Senator, which is the possibility of a universal tariff. | ||
| And it's talked about in the context of our trade deficit, which is over a trillion dollars. | ||
| And part of the question is, how large of a trade deficit do we want? | ||
| Because the trade deficit represents, in large part, manufacturing jobs that have gone overseas and other things like that. | ||
| And a universal tariff is something that should be studied and considered to see if it can reverse the direction of that deficit and the offshoring. | ||
| But I don't think it's going to be. | ||
| I'll hold the record open. | ||
| I've asked three times for an example of where there was history that the President's approach, the across-the-board tariff approach rather than the targeted one, made sense. | ||
| We'll keep the record open. | ||
| Let the record note that I asked it three times and there were no examples. | ||
| Let me give you a question with respect to making more medicine in the United States. | ||
| This is important to many of us, you know, because that's a clear area where we can hold down the costs of medicine, create more choices, have groundbreaking therapies. | ||
| And I'm concerned about, again, the tariff approach that I see emerging from the administration that could make it harder to make more medicine in the United States, something that's clearly a bipartisan goal. | ||
| Senator Crapo and I have been toiling away on bipartisan legislation that could help mitigate the drug shortage. | ||
| So what's the plan to protect patients from the damages the tariffs are going to cause as we try to get these drug supply chains right, create more medicine in the United States, make our country safer and more secure as a result? | ||
| What's the plan? | ||
| Senator, I agree with you that we need to reshore a lot of these supply chains for pharmaceuticals, and we want to do it in a way that's affordable. | ||
| My expectation at a minimum is that the Trump administration is also simultaneously with robust trade policy, they'll be implementing tax policy, energy policy, regulatory policy, the kinds of policies that led to incredible economic growth in the first Trump term when we also had a very strong trade policy that included tariffs. | ||
| We've got a lot to do in terms of getting a lead in medicine, and I don't think your tariffs are going to get us there. | ||
| They're going to set us back. | ||
| We'll have further conversations. | ||
| Thank you, Mr. Chairman. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Thank you. | |
| Senator Bennett. | ||
| Thank you, Mr. Chairman. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Thank you. | |
| I want to thank the ranking member for raising the issue of $9 eggs. | ||
| I think that's a very, very important one. | ||
| Mr. Greer, thank you for being here, and I want to welcome your family as well for being here. | ||
| They are a lot better dressed than my family would be if they were here. | ||
| I wanted to actually want to ask you a question in your opening statement, and I have two questions, so please don't filibuster the answer to this one, because I know it would be actually easy to fill the time because I know you believe in it. | ||
| At the very end, you wrote, I am convinced that we have a relatively short window of time to restructure the international trading system to better serve U.S. interests. | ||
| Can you elaborate on that a little bit? | ||
| I will, and I'll try to be succinct to your point. | ||
| So we're in a position where for the past several decades we have had a default trade policy that was an end unto itself, which was to liberalize United States trade policies in the hopes that other partners would do this. | ||
| As we've discussed, that resulted in quite a bit of offshoring and concentrated losses in some of our industrial communities, also gains for a lot of folks in the ag community and other exporters. | ||
| And then we had bodies like the World Trade Organization presume to exercise sovereignty or authority over our trade laws and limit our ability to do that. | ||
| I think going forward, we need to restructure this. | ||
| We need to have a pragmatic trade policy where we're looking sometimes sector by sector, sometimes economy-wide, often on a bilateral basis. | ||
| How can we have very competitive terms of trade between us and the rest of the world? | ||
| How can we emphasize our areas of competitiveness, technology, agricultural, advanced manufacturing, and be able to take advantage of that in a very particular way, as opposed to just having a default trade policy of let's liberalize everything and see where the chips fall? | ||
| I think also that we had a good conversation when you came by the office, which I appreciated. | ||
| And I think that you agree that we can't tariff our way to prosperity, that there are other policies that we need to preserve, to pursue, to pursue to drive American growth, to protect our national security, and that we need to approach domestic and international politics in a strategic way. | ||
| Trade is part of that, but we have other business to conduct around the world. | ||
| And here also. | ||
| For me, this includes supporting American manufacturing, pursuing trade policies at the same time that we're doing that, that we're serving the farmers and the ranchers that you grew up with and the workers throughout our state, and reducing our dependence on China, which I think is something that there's bipartisan support for here. | ||
| I believe we can do that by investing in the Western Hemisphere, which has been ignored, I think, by administrations on both sides of the aisle. | ||
| That's why Senator Cassie and I are leading the Americas Act, which I mentioned when we were meeting in my office. | ||
| This would bring critical supply chains back to our hemisphere, counter China's economic coercion of our neighbors, which is going on as we speak today in our own hemisphere, and create pathways to economic security that reduce the illegal migration, I think, in the hemisphere. | ||
| So in that context, I would ask you, if you are aware of the Americas Act, if you are thinking about ways in which in our region we'd be able to extend existing agreements or work with Congress to deepen our cooperation and our integration with our neighbors. | ||
| This is something that people at home readily understand when they are asking the question: how can a country of 330 million people compete with India with 1.4 billion people, compete effectively with China, which has 1.3 billion people? | ||
| We obviously don't have those numbers. | ||
| We've got a lot going for us, innovation, commitment to the rule of law, a lack of corruption, the most dynamic economy in the world. | ||
| We've got some big problems, income inequality, and a lack of economic mobility. | ||
| I think working in a strategic way with our neighbors is one of the answers to that. | ||
| And I wonder if you could give me your views on that. | ||
| Well, certainly. | ||
| I have reviewed the Americas Act, and one thing of interest in the trade policy that was put out by the Trump administration a couple of weeks ago, it mentioned the need for USTR, directed USTR, to review our existing trade agreements to see if they can be improved in a way that improves the terms of trade for the United States. | ||
| So I think there's room for a conversation on the types of issues you're talking about. | ||
| We're always going to have international trade, and we want it to be strong. | ||
| We want it to be resilient. | ||
| We want to be with countries that agree with us and are going to play by rules. | ||
| So I think there's room to talk about how to take those kinds of actions and initiatives. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. | |
| Thank you, Senator Cornyn. | ||
| Mr. Greer, congratulations on your nomination. | ||
| And back in, I think it was during the Clinton administration when China was admitted to the World Trade Organization. | ||
| Is that your recollection as well? | ||
| It was the tail end of the Clinton administration. | ||
| I think President Bush signed the paper. | ||
| And the premise of that was that somehow China would become part of the rules-based international order. | ||
| But the fact of the matter is, China cheats, China steals our intellectual property, and they don't recognize a rules-based international order. | ||
| Do you know off the top of your head what sort of tariffs that China imposes on imports into their country? | ||
| I do say that. | ||
| I do, Senator. | ||
| So when it comes to tariff rates, their overall applied tariff rate on average is 7.5 percent. | ||
| On ag products, it's 14 percent. | ||
| But we know that this does not capture the full extent of the non-trade barriers and regulatory hurdles that they impose on our exports. | ||
| And they subsidize a lot of their government-owned enterprises, correct? | ||
| That's exactly right, sir. | ||
| And it makes it very difficult for anyone else to compete, and it results in enormous overcapacity that floods global markets and our own markets. | ||
| It's something that has been a huge factor in the deindustrialization of the United States, which we need to reverse. | ||
| Absolutely. | ||
| Well, I think President Trump was the president who first raised this issue in a very dramatic sort of way, and I think he's exactly right to insist upon reciprocity as a principle. | ||
| Do you agree that reciprocity ought to be the basic principle that drives our trade policy? | ||
| So, Senator, and I know you've been a leader on this issue with respect to investment flows as well with China, and you watch this very closely, so I appreciate your insights here. | ||
| I think that with China, you know, reciprocity is one word we can use, right? | ||
| But I also don't want them to fall into a trap where they say, oh, well, we'll have a 0% tariff on you, and they have other kinds of barriers. | ||
| So, I don't want that word to be misconstrued by the Chinese or anybody else, but I think we do have to have a balanced relationship. | ||
| I think the United States has always been willing to have a balanced relationship with China, but there's Chinese agency in this matter, and they need to decide how open they want to be to us. | ||
| Well, your response reminds me of the conversation we had in my office, and thank you for coming by to visit. | ||
| I talked to you a little bit about something that we're working on in the banking committee, Senator Scott, chairman of the banking committee and others on a bipartisan basis, working on an outbound investment transparency law we thought was going to be added to the continuing resolution of the National Defense Authorization Act. | ||
| But I'm hopeful we can tee this up in a bipartisan way so that as policymakers and as a government, we understand what sort of financial investments are being made by the United States and our friends and allies in China, which are then being used by the Chinese government because there is this Chinese military-civilian fusion, anything that's developed, let's say, | ||
| in the area of technology that has to be shared with the military and with the Chinese Communist Party. | ||
| Do you think it just makes sense that we should have transparency over investments being made in China that may well fuel the modernization of their military in a way that's a threat to peace in the Indo-Pacific and beyond? | ||
| Senator, I think that having this kind of transparency is very important. | ||
| In fact, again, I keep referring back to the Trump administration's policy memo on trade because it is so comprehensive and gives such a clear direction on these things. | ||
| And one of the things it talks about is looking at current efforts around outbound investment to foreign countries of concern. | ||
| And so I think consideration of this kind of control or data gathering information, I think that goes right along with exploring that. | ||
|
Tourism and Trade Accords
00:15:28
|
||
| Talk to me a little bit about the de minimis exception to duty-free trade between countries. | ||
| I know the executive order that President Trump has signed has basically said we need to take a look at that. | ||
| But one of the issues I'm concerned about beyond just the trade issue is the use of this failure to inspect packages, let's say, that come into the United States via the U.S. Postal Service or some other carrier that contain fentanyl or drug precursors. | ||
| Are you aware of this as a potential problem? | ||
| Yes, Senator, I'm aware of this. | ||
| Again, this is something where the Trump administration has signaled that they want to look at this. | ||
| And there are issues around that related to inspection, informal entry, where I think we need to be very careful that this is not a loophole that's being used for tariff evasion, counterfeits, fentanyl and other drugs, or simply to explode the trade deficit. | ||
| I think we definitely need to take a close look at that. | ||
| Thank you, Mr. Greer. | ||
| Thank you, Senator Grassley. | ||
| Oh, I'm next. | ||
| You're up. | ||
| I thought we went back and forth. | ||
| We go by who got here first. | ||
| I'm ready. | ||
| He's always first. | ||
| Thank you for visiting my office. | ||
| I appreciate the conversation we had a couple weeks ago. | ||
| Now that you and Mr. Lutnik have been nominees for several weeks, I'd like to know exactly how much authority do you have on trade matters relative to Mr. Lutnick and other cabinet members. | ||
| Thank you, Senator. | ||
| And I also enjoyed meeting with you in your office. | ||
| And beforehand, since I'm an honorary constituent, my wife is from Dubuque, Iowa. | ||
| So thank you. | ||
| With respect to trade authorities, the United States government, my statute is the statute. | ||
| It designates the office of the U.S. Trade Representative as the chief trade negotiator. | ||
| Negotiating trade deals, Section 301, enforcement authorities are delegated to the United States Trade Representative. | ||
| Obviously, the Sector of Commerce has its own trade authorities over trade remedy laws, export controls. | ||
| You know, the Treasury Secretary often has sanctions through IEPA. | ||
| I think what's important to understand about all of this is the President himself is so focused on trade issues. | ||
| It's something that's very important to him. | ||
| It's been a key platform, playing his platform for decades. | ||
| And he expects that all of his cabinet members and cabinet-level members advising him on trade work together and coordinate. | ||
| So I expect to work very closely with Mr. Lutnick, Mr. Besant, and White House advisors on trade matters, of course, if I'm confirmed. | ||
| I have a short statement I want to read, and then I'll ask you to comment on it after I read it. | ||
| While I think it is important to hold China to its obligations under Phase I agreement, I also fear that it will keep us reliant upon Chinese markets, so we need to be looking around the world at other markets. | ||
| We need to balance our short-term profitability with long-term stability. | ||
| I have for a long time voiced my own concerns about unfair trade practices by China, and I hope that you and President Trump are successful in holding China accountable on issues including fentanyl, intellectual property theft, and government subsidization. | ||
| That said, I believe we must pursue freer trade with other countries to create new markets so that we can move away from China without losing even more global market share to commodities to Brazil and other countries. | ||
| The free trade agreements that were negotiated under George W. Bush have resulted in large trade surpluses in key industries like agriculture and manufacturing. | ||
| And I think we need more free trade. | ||
| And I know that President Trump is more interested in bilateral agreements than multi-state agreements. | ||
| And I think if we look away from Brazil and South Korea and Japan and China and EU as being problem countries for us on trade issues, but there's so many other countries where if we have these agreements, and I use George W. Bush as an example, and his negotiator, Alan Johnson, about 13 countries, | ||
| probably six or seven different agreements with countries you don't even think much about being significant in world trade. | ||
| And they have we've increased tremendously with these free trade agreements our surpluses with those countries and trade. | ||
| So if you want to comment. | ||
| Yes, Senator. | ||
| Everything you just said, I think is really important to keep in mind as we move forward with trade policy. | ||
| I think obtaining other export markets to make sure that our exporters, our farmers and ranchers and anyone else, service providers, manufacturers, are not completely dependent on China for their livelihood, because that can be a high-risk proposition. | ||
| My guess is we'll always trade with China, absent conflagration, God forbid. | ||
| But we do have to have diverse export markets for our exporters. | ||
| And I think that if we can be thoughtful in going to other countries where we see real concrete areas of advancement, we should pursue that. | ||
| And I'm looking forward to working with you if I'm confirmed and the rest of the committee to talk about where we can get the most bang for our buck in other markets to make sure that the agreements we have are aligned with your goals and the administration's goals. | ||
| Brazil is a leading competitor with the United States on agriculture. | ||
| One example is that Brazil has displaced the United States as a world leader in soybean production. | ||
| Another issue with Brazil that I brought up with your predecessor, Ms. Tai, is drastically unfair advantage Brazil has on ethanol. | ||
| U.S. exports face an 18% tariff on ethanol going to Brazil. | ||
| However, Brazilian ethanol comes here nearly duty-free. | ||
| So I hope you will address this trade imbalance with Brazil that Ambassador Try wasn't, Ty wasn't successful in doing, taking action to reduce or eliminate this harmful tariff on American tariffs. | ||
| American ethanol. | ||
| Senator, if I'm confirmed, I will work with you. | ||
| I have a lot of things at the top of my list, but this is one of those things. | ||
| I'm happy to work with you if I'm confirmed. | ||
| Thank you, Senator Cortez-Masto. | ||
| Thank you, Mr. Greer. | ||
| Congratulations on your nomination. | ||
| Welcome to your family. | ||
| Your son has been very patient to your whole family. | ||
| I see. | ||
| I appreciate that. | ||
| I understand the challenges during this long period. | ||
| Let me say this, first of all, thank you for meeting with me. | ||
| I so appreciate the conversation. | ||
| I want to talk about a topic that seems to get lost sometimes when we talk about trade and tariffs, and this topic is so important to Nevada, but also to the United States, which is tourism. | ||
| It's the single largest export for the United States. | ||
| And in my state, as you well know, from Nevada, from Reno to Las Vegas and all parts in between, we are reliant on a strong and vibrant international tourism economy. | ||
| The U.S. Travel Association has warned that 25 percent across-the-board tariffs on Canada will result in fewer Canadians visiting America, causing $2.1 billion in lost spending and 4,000 jobs lost. | ||
| Tariffs on Mexico are likely to have a similar impact. | ||
| So my first question to you is: do you view tourism as an important industry? | ||
| And do you agree that trade wars with neighboring countries are likely to harm tourism? | ||
| Senator, thank you. | ||
| Thank you for your kind words. | ||
| And I also appreciated our meeting in your office, which I thought was insightful. | ||
| With respect to tourism, you know, 100%, this is an important export for the United States. | ||
| And this is why we have tourism promotion agencies at states and other things like that. | ||
| It's critical, I hope, particularly for your state. | ||
| With respect to tariffs on neighboring countries, I think the chairman said it very well in his opening. | ||
| We talked about the action that the President is talking about is about fentanyl, where we don't want another single fentanyl death. | ||
| A kilogram of fentanyl can kill 50,000 people by some calculations. | ||
| And we can't have that, and we need to come to an agreement on that. | ||
| And luckily, Mexico and Canada from the outside looking in, it appears they've come to do that. | ||
| Obviously, where a tariff is concerned, I naturally have equities. | ||
| The Finance Committee naturally has equities. | ||
| So I would want to be involved and come brief the committee on those issues when they come to a front, because I know it's important to you. | ||
| I know it's important to your state. | ||
| Well, let me just talk about the practical impacts here, because various administration officials, including Secretary Vescent, when he testified before this committee, stated that broad tariffs will cause the currency to appreciate. | ||
| And let me just say, as it appreciates, it makes it more expensive to travel to the United States. | ||
| That has an impact on travel and tourism. | ||
| And so I'm hoping that you're taking that into consideration. | ||
| Listen, I don't know anybody in this room or any of my colleagues that doesn't want to fight the war on fentanyl. | ||
| It's impacting all of our communities. | ||
| And there's a way to go about it. | ||
| And I believe this war on fentanyl existed during the first administration of Donald Trump, and he didn't take this action. | ||
| So there is a way to be smart about that that is not also continuing to harm our communities with job loss and billions of dollars of income coming in in the travel community. | ||
| And let me just, I know the administration has put a pause, a 30-day pause on the negotiations with Canada and Mexico, but let me just tell you about the practical impacts of that pause. | ||
| I received a call from a Reno small business yesterday that one of their customers in Canada has canceled their project due to uncertainty, costing them tens of thousands of dollars. | ||
| These are threats that are real. | ||
| They're impacting our small businesses. | ||
| There's uncertainty. | ||
| And so my question to you is, what do I say to my businesses? | ||
| How do I ensure them that workers aren't going to be collateral damages? | ||
| These businesses, small businesses, are not going to be collateral damages when we're engaging in this type of trade war. | ||
| What should I say to this small business? | ||
| Well, the first thing I would say is that they can, for one thing, they can come talk to us at the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative. | ||
| And we want to hear from people who feel affected by this. | ||
| That's very important to have that kind of feedback. | ||
| I would also say that if you look at the first Trump administration, where the President had a very robust use of tariffs and other trade measures and trade negotiations and agreements to create an economy that resulted in real median household income going up by $7,000 in three years, it was historic. | ||
| And so the president knows how to shepherd the economy. | ||
| He knows how to balance these things. | ||
| And I think that we need to stay the course when it comes to fentanyl, when it comes to redoing trade policy. | ||
| So we can all go to the next one. | ||
| I just have to tell them, you're just going to be unfortunately a victim of the trade war. | ||
| Suck it up. | ||
| It's better for the country. | ||
| It's better for everyone else. | ||
| So that's the answer to them. | ||
| I don't think so. | ||
| And I, listen, you're a reasonable man. | ||
| And we had a great conversation. | ||
| There's a lot that is being impacted from our home builders to critical minerals that are essential for this community to titanium sponge that is important for our national security that we have to we don't actually get here in the United States anymore. | ||
| There's a lot of impact here and I'm looking forward to working with you. | ||
| But there's got to be common sense and there's got to be answers for so many businesses that are actually being unfortunately victims of this trade war. | ||
| And if the answer to them is then, well, we just, you have to be a victim. | ||
| We'll shut your doors and we just have to suck it up for the greater good. | ||
| I'm not sure that's an answer I want to carry back to them. | ||
| But I look forward to working with you. | ||
| Thank you, Senator. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Thank you. | |
| Senator Lankford, are you ready? | ||
| You bet. | ||
| Mr. Chairman, thank you. | ||
| Mr. Greer, thanks for stepping into the fray on this. | ||
| There's a lot to be done. | ||
| As you would see, the last four years there's been very little done, and this committee on a bipartisan basis has been incredibly frustrated with just the lack of a phone call coming in to say how are we cooperating together to figure out how we're going to do trade policy and how we're going to do the next place. | ||
| And as you've heard several of my colleagues already say, a lot of us have ag producers that have a great product the whole world wants to buy, and USDR has not been helping us find new markets to be able to do that. | ||
| So we're counting on you to be able to do that. | ||
| If you can't do that, we're going to ask your son to step in and take over and to be able to take that on because clearly everybody looks well prepared in your whole family. | ||
| So I'm glad everybody's here. | ||
| So let me ask this. | ||
| When you step in to this role, there are several things we've already talked about. | ||
| One of them being the Abraham Accords. | ||
| The Abraham Accords countries are still asking the same question. | ||
| What's the benefit of being here? | ||
| And one of those things should be trade. | ||
| One of those things that can be done is how do we trade better? | ||
| How do we form better trade agreements? | ||
| And so the next country that wants to join the Abraham Accords knows if you join, here's the benefit of joining this club. | ||
| How do you start developing some of those things to be able to make sure that that can be done? | ||
| Thank you, Senator. | ||
| And I know that this is an issue that's important to you, and we had a good introductory conversation about it in your office. | ||
| One thing that's interesting about some of those countries, we have existing trade agreements with Jordan and Morocco, for example. | ||
| And so we know there's a pathway to have good trade relations with these folks as well. | ||
| Again, I'd go back to some of the discussions I had earlier with, I think, with Senator Bennett, where the President has directed, let's look at existing trade agreements and let's look at markets where trade agreements might be helpful. | ||
| And let's do it in a way that's coordinated and pragmatic. | ||
| And so I think that if this committee and you believe that we should be looking at some of potential Abraham Accords members as areas where economic growth can happen for Americans and American workers in a good way, then we should talk about that. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Okay. | |
| Well, the focus is there on good foreign policy for us and good for Americans as well. | ||
|
Biggest Market Retaliation Question
00:15:27
|
||
| And establishing peaceful relationships across the country allows us to have better trade agreements and better economic activity on it. | ||
| So we want to continue to be able to drive that messaging home. | ||
| China's been dumping product. | ||
| You and I talked about this a little bit in the office as well. | ||
| I appreciate that. | ||
| The big challenge that we have on China dumping product is not just that they're dumping it, it's that the process that you have to go through to be able to challenge the dumping of that, how many millions of dollars it takes to be able to challenge that. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Leave me alone. | |
| And then who actually enforces that? | ||
| Now, I know this falls largely in the Department of Commerce for the enforcement of this. | ||
| But one of the questions that's going to come to you is, how do we help our companies that know Chinese products are being dumped on them and are killing the market have a better response? | ||
| And what pressure can you put while agreements are going on with the Department of Commerce and trying to be able to prosecute those? | ||
| How do you actually put additional pressure to make sure it stops? | ||
| Yeah, thank you, Senator. | ||
| And yeah, this was a great topic of conversation. | ||
| I know you're concerned about it. | ||
| As many on this committee know, dealing with unfair imports from China is what I do. | ||
| It's what I've done in the private sector. | ||
| It's what I do in the public sector. | ||
| And so one thing that the President has directed, he's directed the Commerce Department to look at the dumping laws and see if they can be improved to better serve American companies and workers. | ||
| With respect to USTR, if I'm confirmed, I would be committed to look at other unfair trade practices that maybe aren't captured fully by the dumping laws to see if we can have, if we need parallel actions going on at the same time to make sure we resolve every aspect of the problem and not just some of the technical dumping issues. | ||
| Okay, that'd be helpful on that. | ||
| There's also been some conversation of late this week dealing with packages coming in from China and how those are going to be handled. | ||
| This is an area that I'd just encourage you to work with CBP. | ||
| There was a pilot agreement that was established in 2019 to see if we could actually manage some of this. | ||
| That pilot program over the last Last four years has exploded and has dramatically changed how we're handling the de minimis issue in USPS. | ||
| So, again, that's not firmly in your area, but it's definitely going to be a trade area that we've got to be able to figure out how to be able to make sure they're paying their fair share of what they should be paying, especially those packages that are coming in from China as a significant amount are. | ||
| One other question that I have for you, you and I talked about in the office. | ||
| When you're negotiating trade agreements, you'll hear many of us talk about the power that you have. | ||
| Countries want to trade with the United States because we produce great products and our manufacturers are tremendous at what they do and they put out a good product and everybody. | ||
| The whole world wants it. | ||
| But that also means when you sit down with them, if people say we want to open up a trade agreement, people are going to want to talk about, many of my colleagues are going to talk about labor agreements and how we're making sure there's unfair labor practices, what we're doing to be able to make sure that we're not having unfair competition. | ||
| But we also have standards in there for things like religious liberty and a free press and all those things. | ||
| So I would just encourage you. | ||
| You are an ambassador in many ways on many issues. | ||
| And when you sit down on trade agreements, you have the ability to be able to sit down to be able to press countries around the world that are oppressing their people on issues like religious liberty and to say, if you want to trade with us, we want to trade with you. | ||
| We want to be fair trade. | ||
| But we also want to see some action in your country as well that begins to balance out our people trading with your people. | ||
| That we also know that you're respecting things like labor rights or a free press or the freedom of religion. | ||
| So I'd encourage you just to be able to take that action as well while you're also working out, watching out for American workers. | ||
| Thank you, Senator. | ||
| We'll be sure to align with the State Department, who is very good on these issues, to make sure that all of our messaging is aligned to encourage the kind of standards and values we would expect. | ||
| Thank you, Mr. Greer, and thank you to your whole family. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Thank you. | |
| Thank you. | ||
| Senator Catwell. | ||
| Thank you, Mr. Chairman. | ||
| Thank you for this important meeting. | ||
| Mr. Grewer, it was great to visit with you. | ||
| And it's good to see your family here. | ||
| Yesterday, the Department of Commerce reported that the United States goods and trade deficit set a record last year of $1.2 trillion. | ||
| So I want to associate myself with the remarks of Senator Grassley, which is I believe our approach here should be opening markets. | ||
| I believe that we should have an aggressive trade strategy, particularly at a time when we have a growing middle class around the world. | ||
| In fact, 2019, before the pandemic hit, the first time the world population, the majority, had reached middle class. | ||
| I think we calculated in my office if you just sold those people one more latte, what was the value of that. | ||
| So clearly, the fact that right now China has a, I think it's something like they import something like $84 billion of agriculture product, that's just one example. | ||
| But these other markets represent a huge opportunity for us. | ||
| So when you say in your comments in answering the question to Senator Grassley, well, we need concrete examples, I think this is where you and I are going to differ. | ||
| And I get that you work for a guy who thinks that you throw down the tariffs and you force something, some little deal out of China when I'm saying I want an aggressive continuation of U.S. policy over decades and decades and decades, yes, the Bush administration, the Clinton administration and others in opening up markets for our agriculture products. | ||
| So I don't like the fact that we tacked taxpayers $28 billion last time during the Trump administration. | ||
| That's what you came and asked, or they came and asked us for to compensate farmers during that loss. | ||
| And believe me, I'm definitely being nicer to you than I've been to Catherine Tai. | ||
| I did not agree with the last trade ambassador's approach to say that I'm going to be the trade ambassador, but I'm not going to spend any time on opening markets. | ||
| So, my question to you is: when you look at apples, and about 30 percent of our market export is to Canada and Mexico, and the U.S. free trade agreement increased that capacity. | ||
| And so, why are we arguing with our closest neighbors, our biggest export markets, for apples, and in the meantime, not going out and opening up more apple markets? | ||
| The tariffs that were put on cost us an unbelievable retaliatory tariff in India. | ||
| It basically decimated the market. | ||
| It went from $120 million in India down to $1 million, and hundreds of families lost their economic livelihood. | ||
| We have about 68,000 people that are employed in the apple sector in our state. | ||
| So, this is no small number. | ||
| I fought hard and did get the Biden administration to work with India and reverse that tariff on apples. | ||
| And I have to say, we are now back to recapturing that market. | ||
| But I don't understand why you think a tariff-first approach is the way to capitalize on the biggest task at hand. | ||
| The biggest task at hand is to get more free trade agreements, to get U.S. products into more places. | ||
| And I think I mentioned to you in my office that I am for an alliance strategy. | ||
| I mentioned on technology. | ||
| I'd rather have a technology NATO. | ||
| I'd rather bring the five biggest democracies and tech-sophistic nations like us and Japan and Australia and Israel and say, okay, these are the rules of the road, China, and nobody in the world should buy from you if, in fact, you have a government backdoor and evangelize that. | ||
| So, I believe in competing with China and making this market work, but I don't understand how the administration can ignore this very big challenge of going and opening up markets and instead get in a fight, for me, with our biggest market when they're not really our problem, and not go chase another market like India, or as my colleague from Iowa said, | ||
| these very interesting markets that people are ignoring. | ||
| Now, look, every administration comes along and says, oh, I like bilaterals, okay, I like FTAs, or I like the, I'm not religious necessarily on tactics, but I want you to have the most aggressive office possible, not to sit here and get into a tariff trade war that doesn't get resolved for five years, but one that's empowered to open up markets and to go get the job done. | ||
| So, I don't understand why this tariff approach, Mr. Chairman, my time has expired, but if somebody could just, oh, I guess we don't have our apple. | ||
| I just, I have to fight for these people. | ||
| I think I mentioned to you. | ||
| In this tariff war, when we lose, it's not that you won't have farmland. | ||
| It's just that it'll be owned by some corporation like Goldman Sachs or Bill Gates or somebody else. | ||
| But those farm jobs, as we saw with this retaliatory tariffs as a result of the Trump tariffs, did cost families, and we can't afford it, and we can't bail them out with taxpayer dollars. | ||
| Thank you, Mr. Chairman. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Thank you. | |
| Senator Daines. | ||
| Chairman, thank you. | ||
| Mr. Greer, it's good to see you here again. | ||
| Thank you for your commitment to service. | ||
| You've seen really the history of your life as one of serving our country. | ||
| I'm grateful to you and your family in that regard. | ||
| President Trump has certainly laid out an ambitious trade agenda. | ||
| He's taken serious action this week to secure American interests. | ||
| I share his view that the United States should use every tool at our disposal to secure our borders, to stop the flow of dangerous drugs into our communities, and to open new markets around the globe. | ||
| I applaud the quick work done by President Trump to ensure that Mexico and Canada are doing their part. | ||
| It's important to note that previous blanket tariff policies for steel and for aluminum had serious effects on a wide range of my constituents in Montana. | ||
| Agriculture is our number one economic driver in Montana. | ||
| In some cases, the price of aluminum in the United States rose 15%, which increased costs of our manufacturers. | ||
| It was ultimately passed on to consumers, like farmers, buying heavy equipment. | ||
| It's equally important that we protect American farmers, American ranchers, small businesses, manufacturers by moving quickly to open up new markets in the face of retaliation. | ||
| The threat of retaliatory tariffs on Montana commodities like wheat, barley, beet sugar, pulse crops still looms as negotiations continue with Canada and Mexico. | ||
| As I chat with my farmers back home, input costs remain very high. | ||
| Farmers and ranchers are facing razor-thin margins, in many cases now, negative margins, and the future cost of important inputs like fertilizer as well as energy remains uncertain. | ||
| Mr. Greer, if confirmed, will you prioritize swift and immediate action to secure new market access for Montana producers who are now facing the threats of retaliatory tariffs? | ||
| Senator, thank you for that. | ||
| And I know that these issues are front and center for you and your constituents in Montana. | ||
| And they're things that I pay very close attention to as well. | ||
| With respect to whether there will be swift action, I think it is safe to say that the President has a bias for action. | ||
| And I am going to do my best to keep up with him so I can open up the markets, so I can report back to him, if I'm confirmed, I'm able to do this, that we're opening markets, we're giving Montana cattle ranchers and other farmers and growers opportunities in a lot of markets to expand their market access, to give them better growth from year to year. | ||
| I know these are razor-thin margins. | ||
| I know every year the farmers and ranchers have to think about how they're going to make their money that year, given the input costs, et cetera. | ||
| And swift action is certainly what you will get from me if I'm confirmed. | ||
| Thank you. | ||
| It's not lost on us that 95% of the world's consumers live outside the United States. | ||
| There's a lot of mouths to feed outside the United States and great opportunities. | ||
| We think about the future of farm and ranch in Montana. | ||
| A lot of that will depend on access to the 95% of consumers who live outside the United States. | ||
| The Biden administration, sadly, and I remember having these confirmation hearings with the former USTR, they pursued a very unambitious trade agenda that created a vacuum and allowed countries to fill the void left because of our absence. | ||
| Well, they were asleep at the wheel. | ||
| Other countries were negotiating trade agreements that resulted in America falling behind. | ||
| From beef exports to China, wheat to Japan, pulse crops to India, Montana Ag has benefited greatly from some of these trade agreements in the Pacific. | ||
| I remember being in China working with the Chinese leadership to remove a 14-year ban on U.S. beef imports. | ||
| It's now one of the largest beef markets in the world. | ||
| We must not forget, despite all the challenges we face with China today, that it is the second largest consumer market in the world, there's a lot of opportunity for growth for our ag producers to get access to that important market. | ||
| We must continue to engage our farmers and ranchers on equal footing with the rest of the world. | ||
| My final question, Mr. Greer. | ||
| How will you ensure that China honors its commitments from that phase one trade deal? | ||
| In fact, Senator Perdue then and myself went to Beijing, sat across the table from Liu Ha back in late 2019 to complete that Phase I deal for President Trump. | ||
| How do we make sure those commitments made in that Phase I deal for U.S. ag products increase access to that important market and again ensure that our producers are on a level playing field? | ||
|
Final Statement on Trade Compliance
00:02:04
|
||
| So, Senator, in the President's trade policy memorandum that he issued two weeks ago, he directed the United States Trade Representative to review China's compliance or noncompliance with the Phase I trade agreement. | ||
| There are mechanisms within that agreement, dispute settlement mechanisms, bilateral between the United States and China, to address failures of compliance. | ||
| So if I were confirmed, I would expect to very quickly assess the results of that compliance review and very quickly go about enforcing compliance. | ||
| I think it is of critical importance that if China wants to trade with the United States and have a healthy economic relationship, if that's possible, if that's possible, that a lot of it is going to be premised on fair market access for our exporters and producers. | ||
| Well, final statement, Mr. Chairman, I'm over, but just one final statement. | ||
| If confirmed, Mr. Greer, I think we will have a very good team in working with you with working, if confirmed, Senator Perdue, soon to be Ambassador David Perdue, to China, working together here in making some tremendous progress in getting access to that very important, very large market for producers. | ||
| Thank you. | ||
| Senator Whitehouse. | ||
| Thanks very much, Chairman. | ||
| Welcome, Mr. Greer. | ||
| Thanks for our meeting. | ||
| As Senator Cassidy and Senator Graham and others and I work together towards trying to figure out a proper border tariff, will you provide us technical support and information to help inform our discussions as we proceed? | ||
| Senator Whitehouse, again, thank you for that meeting yesterday as well and hearing about the possibilities of, I think you're referring to the tariffs on pollution. | ||
|
Chinese Predatory Fishing Fleet
00:15:23
|
||
| Yes, that's exactly right, on pollution. | ||
| So I think when it comes to this problem, just if you'll indulge me for a few seconds. | ||
| Well, I don't have very many seconds in my question. | ||
| I'm happy to work with you, Senator. | ||
| There you go. | ||
| That's the answer you want, right? | ||
| Because we do need your team's technical assistance as we develop a bipartisan proposal. | ||
| We each have our own and we'd like to meld them. | ||
| Second, in my days on the intelligence committee, I developed the proposition that the largest theft in human history was the theft by the Chinese of American intellectual property through cyber intrusions. | ||
| In my view, that theft has never been properly recognized in our commercial relationship with China. | ||
| Is that kind of history of massive theft an appropriate consideration in designing a commercial policy with China, including tariffs? | ||
| Yes, Senator. | ||
| I think that's fundamental to it. | ||
| And I think that that was a driving force behind much of what we did in the first Trump administration with respect to China. | ||
| And third, there is an issue that I think trade policy can help quite a lot, but that we very often overlook here. | ||
| I'm a Rhode Islander, ocean state, fishing community, and what is going on in international fisheries is really a crime. | ||
| There are pirate fishing fleets out there that answer to no one whose crews are essentially modern-day slaves. | ||
| There is a Chinese, a predatory Chinese fishing fleet, and I would put the word fishing fleet in quotes because very often they're doing other business for Chinese intelligence services and the military. | ||
| And we don't have a very robust response to that. | ||
| When we met in Munich for the Munich Security Council with the four-star head of AFRICOM, he said one of the most important things we could do to buttress our relationships with our friends in coastal Africa would be to provide support for them to detect criminal fishing operations, | ||
| to be able to identify who's doing the criminal fishing operations and possibly even to enforce against those criminal fishing operations. | ||
| Our fisheries are having really unfair competition from pirate fishing fleets and from the Chinese fishing fleet that are offshore. | ||
| And it strikes me that they are pretty significant tariff ways. | ||
| When it's a pure pirate operation, it's going to take some doing to trace it back to the nominal home of the vessel. | ||
| Where it's China, boom, you know. | ||
| But I would ask you to work with particular Senator Sullivan and myself, who have been working hard on this issue. | ||
| We have a bill we hope will pass this year to increase the penalties and the transparency around the pirate fishing fleet, slave fleet, if you will. | ||
| And to the extent that this can become a part of our tariff policy, it would be, I think, very, very helpful. | ||
| It would protect American fisheries against illegal and brutal foreign competition and with the side benefit that the rapacious behavior that's happening in our seas is causing massive, massive environmental damage and crushing of fisheries. | ||
| Many of the top-level fish are down, you know, 90% from their previous numbers because these fleets are operating without restriction, without law, and without consequence. | ||
| Is that something you'd be willing to work with Senator Sullivan and me on to try to put a hard stop to? | ||
| Yes, Senator, this is an issue that's important to me, too. | ||
| I know we don't talk about fisheries much, but I really encourage my colleagues to consider that because it's not just a question of economic competition, our fishermen versus their fishermen. | ||
| It is also the fact that the Chinese fishing fleet is an extremely predatory extension of Chinese power into a whole bunch of areas. | ||
| And unless we're taking that on as a national security problem, we're missing a very significant part of the problem set here. | ||
| So thank you. | ||
| I agree with the points you made about our fisheries, Senator Whitehouse. | ||
| We need to pay attention to them. | ||
| Looking forward to working with you on it, Mr. Chairman, and with, of course, Senator Sullivan. | ||
| Thank you. | ||
| Senator Smith. | ||
| Thank you, Mr. Chair and Ranking Member, and welcome, Mr. Greer. | ||
| I'm so glad to see you and appreciate your family being here and your willingness to serve our country. | ||
| So I believe that too often our national trade policy over the last 35 years or so has really failed American workers. | ||
| Under both Democratic and Republican administrations, the profits of big corporations, big corporate interests who want to import cheap goods have been put ahead of the interests of workers who make things in Minnesota and in America. | ||
| And I think that there also is a direct connection between the significant income inequality that we see in this country and the way that our trade policy has been used to benefit big capital and multinational corporations. | ||
| And as many of my colleagues have discussed this morning, it's not just jobs on the line, it is also our national security. | ||
| For example, our failed trade policy, failed trade policy means that we're way too dependent on China for many things, including critical medicines and technologies. | ||
| So let me ask you, the role of the U.S. Trade Representative is a balancing act. | ||
| If you're confirmed, you would be responsible for forging new trade deals, for maintaining existing export markets, protecting domestic producers from unfair foreign competition, and also making sure that other countries comply with existing trade deals. | ||
| Did I capture that correctly, do you think? | ||
| I think that's right, Senator. | ||
| Yes. | ||
| And would you agree that part of the balance that we need to strike is that our trade policy doesn't end up pitting American manufacturers against American farmers and vice versa? | ||
| Yes, I agree 100% with that. | ||
| So in order to strike this balance as U.S. trade representative, you're going to have several tools at your disposal. | ||
| For example, let's take an example of a factory in Mexico that is illegally suppressing wages and gaining an unfair advantage over U.S. facilities and workers in the process. | ||
| You could deploy the USMCA's rapid response labor mechanism to get at that problem. | ||
| Would you agree with that? | ||
| Yes, Senator, that's correct. | ||
| And if a foreign country is engaging in unfair trade practices, you can investigate that. | ||
| And you could impose Section 301 tariffs, for example, on products like, for example, steel. | ||
| President Trump did this in his first term on some Chinese imports, and President Biden, I think, expanded that with respect to EVs and other critical goods, which I supported on both the Trump administration and the Biden administration. | ||
| Have I captured that, do you think? | ||
| This is not leading to a trick question, so don't worry. | ||
| No, you have captured it, yes. | ||
| I want to go through this because I do think that we can find common ground when you and the Trump administration is standing up for Minnesota workers and Minnesota farmers and American producers. | ||
| And I think that we could work together, for example, on taking on China's cheating when it comes to trade. | ||
| You can hear this as an issue on both sides of the aisle here. | ||
| But if the Trump administration is going to be taking reckless steps, such as the President's blanket tariffs on our close allies in Canada and Mexico, I mean, I'm going to fight that because I don't think that that is going to be good for American workers. | ||
| I think it's going to end up hurting American workers. | ||
| So let me ask you how this sort of pans out in real time. | ||
| You have talked about identifying new opportunities for opening up new markets. | ||
| This is a long and arduous process. | ||
| It doesn't just happen. | ||
| I'm thinking, for example, of the example, I'm thinking of what happened with the Colombian market. | ||
| There was a big effort to open up the Colombian market to American poultry products, big deal in Minnesota. | ||
| Then here comes President Trump. | ||
| He announces this 25 percent blanket tariff on Columbia. | ||
| Now, I know, I understand that he's pulled that back, but what I fear is that the United States, with this kind of kind of erratic and chaotic trade policy, it's going to make us seem like an unreliable negotiator and trading partner. | ||
| I mean, Mr. Greer, how do you go in and try to negotiate in good faith with potential trading partners when we have a president who appears willing to trade up and tear up agreements on a whim on an issue that might be completely unrelated to trade? | ||
| So, Senator, first of all, thank you for what I think is a very good summation of how trade policy should work. | ||
| It's important to remember that when we have trade agreements, they all contain an exception for measures related to essential security. | ||
| And if dealing with illegal migration of criminals or dealing with fentanyl or issues like that come up, this is very clearly an issue of essential security. | ||
| Other presidents have used sanctions that just cut off trade entirely. | ||
| The president hasn't chosen to do that here. | ||
| He's chosen to use a different possibility. | ||
| But I think that's going to be important for me, if I'm confirmed, to make sure that I'm coordinating with whatever agency is implementing the tariffs or other trade measure, whether it be a sanction, to make sure that we are balancing the needs of trade agreements, opening markets, protecting workers, and dealing with essential security matters. | ||
| So I think this is going to continue to be an issue of real salience and concern for me and for Minnesotans. | ||
| And I think, for example, of the work that Minnesotan producers went to sort of build on those trading agreements, to build trading relationships with folks around the world, including in Columbia, only to feel as if the ground is being cut out from under them on something that is completely unrelated in their minds to what that agreement was about. | ||
| And of course, trade agreements, as you well know, we talked about this, don't just, it's not like turning on a light. | ||
| And if you're a producer, you build those relationships over time. | ||
| And then there's also what happens because for every action, there's a reaction, and that ends up hurting American producers as well. | ||
| So this is an area where I think we're going to have significant challenges. | ||
| Thank you, Mr. Chair. | ||
| Thank you, Senator Hassan. | ||
| Well, thank you, Mr. Chair and Ranking Member, for this hearing. | ||
| Welcome, Mr. Greer, and congratulations on your nomination and to you and your family as well. | ||
| Before we dive into trade issues, I want to ask you a really simple question in light of recent events. | ||
| If directed by the President of the United States to take action that would break the law, would you follow the law or follow the President's directive? | ||
| I can't imagine the President asking me to break the law and I never would do it. | ||
| And if he directs you to do something that would break the law, you will stand by the law or stand with the President? | ||
| I will always stand by the law and the President will too. | ||
| Thank you. | ||
| We will differ on the last point, but we will certainly hold you to that commitment. | ||
| Over the weekend, President Trump announced tariffs on all products imported from Canada, which he has since delayed but will go into effect in a few weeks. | ||
| About 80 percent of New England's fuel supply comes from Canada. | ||
| Before the President delayed the tariffs to next month, some home heating oil customers in New Hampshire were notified that they would have to pay a 10 percent surcharge, the proposed amount of the tariff, on their home heating oil bills. | ||
| That would add over $100 to the cost of filling a 275-gallon tank with home heating oil. | ||
| The President's tariffs on imports from Canada would also drive up many other prices in New Hampshire, given that Canada is New Hampshire's largest trading partner. | ||
| So, Mr. Greer, if confirmed, how would you track the impact of the President's tariffs on New Hampshire's families and small businesses, and what actions would you take to address increased prices caused by these tariffs? | ||
| So, Senator, thank you for that question. | ||
| And that's certainly something that I expect, if confirmed, not only the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative, but the Council on Economic Advisors and others would be looking closely at the economic effects of any measures taken to secure the national security of the United States. | ||
| These are things where it's hard to do this. | ||
| How do we balance the cost of lives lost of fentanyl against other potential costs? | ||
| And I know that's not what you're asking, but I just need to watch it. | ||
| You do not have to talk to me about lives lost from fentanyl. | ||
| I was governor of New Hampshire for four years. | ||
| I've been on the forefront of combating fentanyl in this body and in New Hampshire for a decade now, and we're actually making some progress, progress, by the way, that was threatened by the OMB order that froze critical grants that were appropriated by this Article I body of the United States Constitution. | ||
| But look, what I have heard from my customers, some of whom voted for Mr. Trump because he promised them their essential costs would come down, they are getting this document from Irving Oil Company that is telling them that their home heating oil expense will go up by the amount of the tariff. | ||
| And when we talked in my office, you said you didn't expect that to happen. | ||
| Well, it is happening. | ||
| At the same time, by the way, the OMB order threatened home heating assistance to people. | ||
| It was minus 20 degrees in Berlin, New Hampshire on Sunday. | ||
| And between the tariff threat and the home heating oil freeze, people are really worried about being able to heat their homes. | ||
| So what I want to know is what will you do if confirmed to combat that increase in price caused by tariffs? | ||
| Well, first of all, I think it's important to note that when the President put out those executive orders related to tariffs on potential tariffs on Canada and Mexico, they were for 25 percent. | ||
| But there was, you know, explicitly they said it would just be 10 percent on energy. | ||
| I think what's important is, you know, for my role, I want to make sure that I'm coordinating with Customs and Border Protection, Homeland Security, so I can understand where they are in negotiations with Canada so that we can make sure that they're not. | ||
| So here's what we need at the northern border. | ||
| We need, yes, more cooperation from Canada, although they have been good partners. | ||
| We need a lot more border personnel from the United States government, and we need to take some other quick actions. | ||
| But let me just remind you that $100 more for a family to fill their heating tank is a significant cost and may cause some real, real harm. | ||
| And there are other ways to combat the security issues than you're talking about than making people who are hardly making it through the winter pay $100 more for each tank of oil. | ||
| Now, let's turn to another issue. | ||
| When we met in December, we discussed creating a hotline at the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative for small businesses to call to help navigate increased prices from tariffs. | ||
|
New Mexico's Trade Concerns
00:06:25
|
||
| This hotline would also help small businesses navigate any exclusion process set up by the administration. | ||
| It's critical for the New Hampshire small businesses that any exclusion process be fair, transparent, and nonpartisan. | ||
| Will you commit to working with me to create this small business hotline at USTR? | ||
| I will, yes, Senator. | ||
| Thank you. | ||
| I see my time is up. | ||
| I'll submit my remaining question on out-competing China, something I've worked on with Senator Cassidy for the record. | ||
| Thank you. | ||
| Thank you. | ||
| Senator Lujan. | ||
| Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and to our Ranking Member for holding this hearing today. | ||
| In 2024, New Mexico exported over $10.5 billion worth of goods, up from less than $5 billion the year before. | ||
| Over 60 percent of those exports last year went to Mexico and were worth over $6.5 billion. | ||
| Mr. Gere, I appreciated our conversation yesterday about your priorities and thoughts regarding the United States Trade Representative Ambassador's role in directing trade policy in this country and its impact on our economy and American workers. | ||
| As you know, the 2026 USMCA review is approaching and President Trump has threatened tariffs on Mexico. | ||
| What specific changes to the agreement would you advocate for? | ||
| Thank you, Senator. | ||
| And I also appreciated our conversation yesterday in your office. | ||
| And I know that being a border state, that gives you unique insight into our relationship with Mexico, which, as you also acknowledged, is complex across not just trade, but security, foreign policy, et cetera. | ||
| As we enter into this process of taking a second look at USMCA, which again was built into the process deliberately by the administration and Congress to make sure that the agreement remains relevant and beneficial to Americans, I think we need to look closely at things like the rules of origin to make sure that third countries or foreign countries of concern are not inadvertently or deliberately benefiting or free-riding on the agreement at the expense of America and our trading partners. | ||
| I want to make sure that the type of market access we've secured in Canada and Mexico are things that are actually acted upon. | ||
| We all know we have issues with Canada dairy, corn into Mexico. | ||
| We have issues with energy in Mexico. | ||
| These are things where our trading partners need to be held accountable. | ||
| And it's important for the political and economic sustainability of that agreement and our trade relationships with Canada and Mexico that these issues be addressed and be addressed in a timely way. | ||
| Are there any specific changes that you could name today, Mr. Gere, former chief of staff, USTR under the previous Trump administration? | ||
| You were instrumental in the drafting and negotiating of these documents. | ||
| You're one of the few people that has intimate knowledge about these documents, maybe most well-versed. | ||
| Are there any changes that you would point to that you would change? | ||
| Yes, I certainly would. | ||
| I think I would want to, you know, I mentioned the rules of origin. | ||
| I think we should look at the rules of origin for automobiles and aerospace and other things. | ||
| And I think we need to look and see if we need to have any kind of restriction on content or value added from foreign countries of concern or non-market economies, countries that benefit from unfair trading practices or subsidies and somehow get their content into goods that are going across the border. | ||
| And they benefit from the agreement without taking any obligations. | ||
| And so I think it would be worthwhile for us to look, working with the unions, working with industry, working with our exporters, to see what we can do to make sure that the agreement benefits American workers and American businesses as opposed to businesses and workers in third countries. | ||
| Would you protect or change the language surrounding the clauses in the trade agreement to workers as it's currently drafted? | ||
| We worked closely in the first Trump administration with labor to develop what I think is the most ambitious labor chapter in any agreement. | ||
| Senator Wyden, he helped develop a lot of that language, including the rapid response mechanism. | ||
| If you're as my time has expired, would you protect that language? | ||
| I would certainly protect it. | ||
| See if we can improve it. | ||
|
unidentified
|
I appreciate that. | |
| Now, given that Mexico is New Mexico's largest trade partner, how will you ensure that increased tariffs do not disrupt my state's economy? | ||
| So something that's very important to look at, and again, we have history on this. | ||
| In the first Trump term, where we had a very aggressive and robust trade policy where inflation actually went down over time, unemployment went down. | ||
| And so as we're implementing, if I'm confirmed, I'm able to help implement a robust and pragmatic trade policy, at the same time the administration is going to be implementing pragmatic energy policy, competitive tax policy, regulatory policy, permitting policy. | ||
| And all of these things need to work together to result in growth across all demographics, which is something we achieved in the first Trump administration, and we can do it again. | ||
| Not to oversimplify, but trickle-down economics will help my state because of the president's approach to the economy if these tariffs are enacted? | ||
| Senator, I don't believe at all that it's trickled down. | ||
| These are the kinds of, whether it's tariffs or market opening, these are benefits that go directly to workers who are working on the line in a factory or people who are working at a farm and are going to export this. | ||
| This is broad-based growth. | ||
| This is how it happened in the first Trump term. | ||
| There was broad wage and income growth across demographics. | ||
| And I think that's the kind of growth we want to have. | ||
| Mr. Greer, can I get your commitment that if these tariffs negatively impact the businesses in New Mexico, I have your word to get that corrected? | ||
| Well, Senator, I want to hear from you on what those impacts are and what we can do to make sure that they are able to benefit from the growth. | ||
|
unidentified
|
I believe your word should be good. | |
| Do I have your word that I can count on you to make sure that New Mexico's businesses don't get hurt by these threatened tariffs? | ||
| Senator, I want to make sure that they don't. | ||
| I can't guarantee economic outcomes, but we can create incentives that are designed to benefit workers and the businesses they work for. | ||
| And I want to work with you to promote that and pursue that. | ||
|
Trade Policy in Tennessee
00:11:07
|
||
| I can't guarantee everything the market's going to do or the wages do, but we can do what we can to make sure it's broad-based growth. | ||
|
unidentified
|
I yield back, Mr. Chairman. | |
| Thank you. | ||
| Senator Blackburn. | ||
| Thank you, Mr. Chairman. | ||
| And Mr. Greer, I'm delighted to know you have such strong Tennessee roots and how appropriate that your family hells from Trade Tennessee. | ||
| We think that's a pretty good motto. | ||
| And we need to get you back in the state, let you see our world-class logistics in Memphis, and meet some of these wonderful manufacturers that we have in the state. | ||
| Trade is important to us in Tennessee. | ||
| Last year, we had about $62 billion in goods in manufacturing plants with over 360,000 workers. | ||
| And of course, this is automobiles, it is appliances, and it's good old Tennessee whiskey. | ||
| And that, of course, being a primary export from our state. | ||
| But Tennessee is one of those states that is a manufacturing powerhouse. | ||
| And because of this, the inputs are important. | ||
| And right now, I've got two bipartisan bills over in Commerce Committee that deal with supply chains and strengthening those supply chains because those key components, whether it's specialty metals or minerals or active pharmaceutical ingredients, all of this in advanced manufacturing is vital to us. | ||
| And knowing that these inputs are going to come from trusted sources, that they are going to come from our allies and allow us to return to domestic manufacturing is something that is important. | ||
| So what I'd like to hear from you is what steps you will take to strengthen these supply chains for us, for these domestic manufacturers, and make certain they can get what they need without having to necessarily deal with China. | ||
| Thank you, Senator. | ||
| And it was great to meet with you in your office, and you have been a consistent supporter for me, and I just really appreciate that. | ||
| That means a lot to me. | ||
| And you are fortunate in Tennessee to have a really dynamic economy. | ||
| And I think a lot of the country can learn a lot by looking at Tennessee, because you manufacture, you have Ag, you have IP, you have all these things that lead to robust growth. | ||
| And so I think when you talk about supply chains, I think that's really important. | ||
| Historically, we have often approached trade policy sometimes on a product-by-product basis, right? | ||
| You can have a producer and go get a trade remedy for a specific product, and that's very important. | ||
| But we need to be thinking about it in terms of supply chains, particularly strategic ones. | ||
| And in many cases, we need to have trade policies and other policies, economic policies, that incentivize production in the U.S. so we can have a secure source. | ||
| At the same time, there are going to be instances where we need to procure this from elsewhere. | ||
| And we want to, again, create incentives to bring in these kinds of things to the extent we have to from countries that agree with us on things that matter the most, countries that abide by the rule of law. | ||
| Now, I'm a little skeptical because I know that a lot of countries, even those that say they're our allies, have their own unfair trade practices and subsidies and things that undermine free and fair trade. | ||
| So I want to deal with that. | ||
| That's true. | ||
| And Senator Hassan mentioned to you about small businesses. | ||
| We have small business distributors that can only get things from a certain country. | ||
| And there needs to be that carve-out or that recognition. | ||
| You take something like Tequila for a distributor in Tennessee. | ||
| There's only one place they are going to get that. | ||
| Likewise, you mentioned AG. | ||
| And we have 70,000 farms in the state. | ||
| 90 percent of those are independent. | ||
| They are not corporate farms. | ||
| And China had agreed to purchase $200 billion. | ||
| You are very well aware of that. | ||
| That was part of the Phase I deal. | ||
| You were a part of that. | ||
| China is not living up to buying the soy and the cotton and the things that were included in that deal for Tennessee farmers. | ||
| And we would like to have your attention on that. | ||
| Senator, my attention will be on that if I am confirmed. | ||
| The President has already directed the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative to review that agreement to assess areas of noncompliance. | ||
| And before my time runs out, digital trade is vitally important to us. | ||
| You mentioned IP protections, and for many of our innovators, our entertainers, having this presence in digital trade and making certain that we are not weakening our position on the global stage or hurting Tennessee businesses that transact in that virtual space, that will be important. | ||
| And my time is up, but I would like for you to submit to me what we can do, what you will do to recoup that digital trade and protect that IP. | ||
| And I thank you. | ||
| Yell back, Mr. Chairman. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Thank you. | |
| Senator Welch. | ||
| Pardon me. | ||
| Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman, and welcome. | ||
| You are being considered for one of the most important jobs that affects our economy, as you know. | ||
| You have a lot of experience in the work you have done. | ||
| My view is that trade policy has failed the average American. | ||
| We have exported jobs in return for importing cheap goods, and it has hollowed out a lot of communities. | ||
| It's something that President Trump did talk about. | ||
| So, the first thing I want to ask you is, how do you see and what are the specific agreements you will be working on when you take office? | ||
| Thank you, Senator, and I appreciate your sentiments on trade policy. | ||
| I really enjoyed our conversation. | ||
| Right out the gate, I expect that we will be taking a second look at the USMCA. | ||
| It is something that is mandated by the agreement. | ||
| And as part of that review, I am supposed to go to the public and get their views. | ||
| I am supposed to go to Congress and talk to you about your reviews. | ||
| At the moment, what is your assessment of how that has worked out? | ||
| That was, of course, negotiated during the Trump administration. | ||
| Sure. | ||
| So, in some areas, it has driven, for example, expanded automotive production in North America and the United States, which is beneficial. | ||
| I know that the Biden administration has taken steps to look at labor conditions in Mexico, and I know that a lot of our ag community was very happy to get secure, continued, and in some cases, expanded ag market access. | ||
| But there are problems, too. | ||
| What role do you see tariffs playing in our trade policy? | ||
| So, with respect to tariffs and trade policy, we need to create incentives to produce in America, and we need to create incentives to get market access overseas. | ||
| Our average tariff rate in the United States is 3.5 percent, which is substantially lower than many markets. | ||
| And so we've lost a lot of the time. | ||
| You've answered my question. | ||
| So, you see tariffs as a tool for market access and for onshoring jobs here? | ||
| Exactly. | ||
| It can be used as a tool for revenue. | ||
| It can be used as a tool. | ||
| That's a whole new thing. | ||
| I mean, your job is trade policy. | ||
| And if what we are talking about is tariffs for revenue, would you agree with me that that is a tax? | ||
| That's raising, the tariffs are ultimately paid by the consumers. | ||
| Well, taxes, Senator, are an assessment on foreign goods, on the value of foreign goods made by foreign workers in foreign countries. | ||
| And then the trade boarder has to decide whether it's a good question. | ||
| I'm going to stop here a minute. | ||
| When you're using your responsibility on trade policy, I get that. | ||
| But if a tariff is being used essentially as a negotiating tool on a one-off situation as these recent tariffs on Mexico and Canada were, that's a tax and it's beyond trade policy. | ||
| It's the President trying to use that power for leverage. | ||
| Do you think that the proper use of the congressionally extended authority to the President in national emergencies to impose tariffs apply to a national emergency that we have with Canada? | ||
| Yes. | ||
| Okay, I don't. | ||
| Do you think that there should be a heads up to an ally like Canada that we are contemplating doing something that is going to have a big impact on the USMCA, where we negotiated that in good faith, and by and large, all parties are in compliance? | ||
| Certainly. | ||
| In this instance, the President talked about this, I think, in late November and talked about it for several months. | ||
| You know, we have been hearing, I am with Senator Hassan, this has a huge impact on Vermont. | ||
| You know, we do most of our trade with Canada, and we had a roundtable, and I just asked various businesses, and we had over 150 businesses on this call, and it was everyone from a large, a very successful construction company, PC Construction, to a woman who gets yarn and does weaving, and organic farmers. | ||
| Every one of these people was just stunned at the implications that these out-of-the-blue threats of tariffs were going to have on their businesses. | ||
| I mean, don't people deserve a heads-up in Vermont before they get whacked with what appears to be a tariff for an individual objective of President Trump? | ||
| So, Senator, the President was very transparent about this for several months, that he was contemplating doing this specifically because of the fentanyl and illegal migration issues. | ||
| And so I think it is very important for people to understand what might be coming, especially when the president is going to use his congressionally delegated responsibilities to execute the laws. | ||
| I appreciate you and your candor. | ||
| Mr. Chairman and Ranking Member, I do have concern about the delegation, the abuse of the delegation of tariff authority to a president to be used in a national emergency to be used in one-off negotiating tactics. | ||
| And I do believe that's a tax. | ||
| And I don't think that any president should be able to unilaterally impose a tax. | ||
| And one of the things I'm increasingly worried about is the abdication of our own Article I authority in weakening this branch of government for any president to totally disregard the people's branch. | ||
|
Georgia's Clean Energy Exemptions
00:15:38
|
||
| Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. | ||
| Thank you. | ||
| Senator Warnock. | ||
| Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. | ||
| In our meeting, we discussed the importance of the Inflation Reduction Act and its clean energy investments in Georgia. | ||
| I enjoyed our conversation very much. | ||
| Welcome and congratulations to you and welcome to your family. | ||
| Thank you. | ||
| But we talked about these provisions in the IRA. | ||
| The state of Georgia has seen growth in our advanced manufacturing sector with both domestic companies and foreign companies making significant investments due in large measure to the IRA's clean energy investments, bringing a lot of jobs to Georgia. | ||
| One of the things that I'm very proud of as a lifelong native of Georgia is that little Dalton, Georgia, known as the carpet capital of the world, if you're walking on the floor anywhere, there's a good chance that you're walking on something created in Dalton. | ||
| But who would have imagined that Dalton, Georgia would become such a leader in the manufacturing of solar panels? | ||
| This is due to the Korean solar manufacturer Q Cells bringing thousands of jobs to Georgia, creating a domestic solar industry almost entirely free from Chinese supply chains. | ||
| However, it needs trade protections to compete against a heavily subsidized Chinese industry. | ||
| If confirmed as the nation's trade representative, how would you work to protect and to grow domestic solar and clean energy manufacturing to ensure our supply chain does not depend on China? | ||
| Thank you, Senator. | ||
| And I'm glad to hear you express concern and interest in this. | ||
| These are things I'm concerned about, too. | ||
| To the extent that there's going to be energy products manufactured and used in the United States, it would be great to have them made here and that we're not using panels that come from China. | ||
| In some instances, may include product of forced labor or the product of subsidies. | ||
| And so the first Trump administration did a safeguard tariff. | ||
| The Commerce Department for many years has had other tariffs in place, and I think that those can be effective tools, which you've testified to this, that we have some of these, that this new production in the United States. | ||
| And we see a place like Europe where they didn't do those tools, and we see their solar panel industry go away. | ||
| So I'm very interested in maintaining and exploring possibilities to ensure we have that production here. | ||
| I appreciate that, and I look forward to continuing to have that conversation. | ||
| I'm excited about the investments in solar energy in Georgia. | ||
| I'm also proud that Georgia in many ways is leading the country in building electric cars entirely in the United States, employing thousands of Georgians. | ||
| Down near my hometown with a Kia plant open, we got about 9,000 or more jobs that have been created in that area, a major boom, economic boom. | ||
| President Trump and congressional Republicans have bragged about repealing federal investments in the green economy that have created these jobs, jobs that have bipartisan support in my state. | ||
| I support what we're doing there. | ||
| The governor, the Republican governor supports it, others. | ||
| This is a top bipartisan economic issue in Georgia. | ||
| It's about American manufacturing. | ||
| If confirmed, how will you use your position to protect the investments and thousands of jobs, jobs that foreign car companies have brought to Georgia? | ||
| Well, Senator, my role in my jurisdiction in the administration is to negotiate trade deals where appropriate and to do trade enforcement as necessary, which is certainly an area where I want to make sure that any manufacturing you have, it doesn't have to compete unfairly with foreign product with respect to other incentives or other legislation. | ||
| That's something that I believe that the Treasury Department, the Energy Department working with the President and Congress will determine the way forward on that. | ||
| So I'm not sure. | ||
| Would you agree that if we see that space, that that's not good, that's not a net positive result for American business and manufacturing? | ||
| I mean, I think we need to have advanced manufacturing here in the United States as much as possible, whether it's traditional or electric vehicles or solar panels or items for ideology around clean energy should not enter into the shouldn't stop us from doing what's necessary. | ||
| Well, if we're going to have manufacturers manufacturing clean energy that makes sense in the broader energy policy, we should be making those things here to the extent possible. | ||
| I agree with that. | ||
| Thank you so much. | ||
| I have other questions, but I'm about out of time. | ||
| Thank you for recognizing the time. | ||
| I appreciate it. | ||
| Senator Warren. | ||
| Thank you, Mr. Chairman. | ||
| Congratulations on your nomination, Mr. Greer. | ||
| Tariffs are an important strategic economic tool, but I am concerned that President Trump is stumbling into a trade war that won't protect jobs, that won't keep Americans safe, and that won't bring down costs for American families. | ||
| That said, I think you and I agree that for too long, U.S. trade policy has been a race to the bottom with deal after deal that sold out American workers and helped multinational corporations offshore critical industries. | ||
| But lately, that has been changing under U.S. trade rep Bob Lighthizer and then under U.S. trade rep Catherine Tai. | ||
| And I appreciate your work as chief of staff under Ambassador Lighthizer. | ||
| Ambassador Lighthizer, I think, had it right when he wrote that problems in our trade relationship with China and U.S. trade policy in general can be traced to, quote, the political establishment of both the Republican and Democratic parties under the influence of multinational corporations and importers, end quote. | ||
| Mr. Greer, do you agree with Mr. Lighthizer that multinational corporations have just had too much power over U.S. trade policy? | ||
| I agree with Ambassador Lighthizer, and I believe that trade policy in the past has been designed to help that sector and has ignored other sectors. | ||
| Good. | ||
| Well, we've got to start by recognizing the problem, right? | ||
| For too long, corporate lobbyists have bought their way into our trade policy, and I am glad to see that changing. | ||
| But raising tariffs doesn't necessarily mean an end to corporate capture. | ||
| When the last Trump administration hiked tariffs, corporate lobbyists lined up to demand exemptions. | ||
| And now, with President Trump threatening even more tariffs, they're ready to do it again. | ||
| So, what did this tariff exemption process look like the last time around? | ||
| Well, I investigated, and I found that the Trump Commerce Department was three times as likely to approve exemptions for Chinese and Japanese headquartered companies than American ones. | ||
| Mr. Greer, favoring foreign companies over American ones, is that good trade policy? | ||
| Senator, I think that our trade policy needs to make sure that we have American businesses and American workers prioritized. | ||
| Okay. | ||
| Let's try another one. | ||
| A recent study found that the Trump USTR officials were more likely to grant exemptions to China tariffs to companies that had made campaign contributions to Republicans or had lobbyists who had recently left the Trump administration. | ||
| Mr. Greer, favoring companies with deep pockets and political connections, is that good trade policy? | ||
| Of course not. | ||
| Any kind of program like that needs to be transparent and have the rules outlined, which it did. | ||
| I appreciate that answer. | ||
| This time around, President Trump has proposed far broader tariffs than we've seen before, potentially on all goods from all countries. | ||
| And with more and more tariffs, the corporate scramble for exemptions is more and more intense. | ||
| One trade lobbyist recently said, and I quote, absolutely everyone is calling. | ||
| It is nonstop. | ||
| And let's be clear, most businesses across America cannot afford armies of lobbyists. | ||
| So, Mr. Greer, do you support tariff exclusions, these exemptions? | ||
| And if so, what changes would you make to ensure that it is a fair process and not just a giveaway to political insiders and deep-pocketed corporations? | ||
| So, Senator, I know you've been a leader on this and you've given a lot of thought to it, which I think is important. | ||
| Anytime we're taking economic actions, whether it's a tariff or an exclusion, we need to be careful about this. | ||
| We need to be thoughtful. | ||
| I don't know in the event tariffs are applied. | ||
| I don't know if the president intends to have an exclusion policy or program at all. | ||
| To the extent something like this happens, it needs to be transparent. | ||
| One thing that they did at USTR the first time around is if one company got an exclusion, any company got an exclusion, right? | ||
| So, if a big company got an exclusion for a certain product, a small business would too. | ||
| So, again, I don't know if there will be exclusion processes, but you think I said to the extent there is, they need to be transparent, need to be fair for small and large. | ||
| Well, I very much appreciate what you have to say around this. | ||
| As I said before, I think tariffs are an important tool. | ||
| And when used strategically and fairly, they can promote American industries, they can protect domestic supply chains, they can protect the jobs of American workers. | ||
| But we can't have a get-out-a-tariff-free system for those that are very wealthy or politically connected, because that will undermine the whole process. | ||
| Thank you. | ||
| Thank you, Mr. Chairman. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Thank you. | |
| Senator Johnson. | ||
| Hey, Mr. Chairman. | ||
| Mr. Greer, welcome. | ||
| When I was chairman of Homeland Security in February of 2020, right as the pandemic was starting, we held a hearing with Scott Gottlieb, other former heads of CDC, FDA, that type of thing. | ||
| One of the things I was surprised to find out is that we really don't produce the precursor chemicals or the active pharmaceutical ingredients for our drugs. | ||
| And I felt that was an enormous vulnerability. | ||
| So that would be at the top of my list in terms of strategic products that we do need to bring back manufacturing. | ||
| Now, there's a host of reasons we won't do it. | ||
| It's a refining process, environmental regulations. | ||
| What other strategic products are kind of top of your list that we do need to think out of the box, figure out how to bring those back here so we're not vulnerable. | ||
| And how would you view your role in terms of using your position to help achieve those goals? | ||
| Senator Johnson, I'm glad you raised this because this is something I think about a lot and I've written about it and I've testified before Congress previously about these kinds of issues. | ||
| So pharmaceuticals for sure is one that I think we need to look at. | ||
| Semiconductors and downstream electronics, something where Congress has taken action. | ||
| I think we need to look at aerospace too, right? | ||
| We have Chinese aircraft manufacturers that are coming online and they're going to, they're going to be a challenge in the market. | ||
| I think robots. | ||
| Well, we probably need to help Boeing as opposed to try and beat up on them, right? | ||
| Well, we can talk to Senator Carrington. | ||
| They've got some problems, yeah. | ||
| Correct. | ||
| But I think also industrial robotics, obviously technologies like AI and quantum computing, we need to be ahead of the game here. | ||
| So I think you're aware Wisconsin is not only a big agricultural state, but also a manufacturing state. | ||
| And the reality is, I mean, when we start slapping tariffs on steel, I've got manufacturers who only can import some of the types of steel. | ||
| They're competing against global manufacturers that are going to have access to Chinese steel. | ||
| You understand that double-edged sword nature of a trade war in that situation. | ||
| Can you just kind of speak to how we can handle that and try and minimize whatever pain tariffs might create? | ||
| Certainly. | ||
| So the steel and aluminum tariffs that were imposed by the Trump administration and kept by the Biden administration, as I think you know, are managed and operated by the Department of Commerce. | ||
| And so, you know, to the extent I'm working with the Secretary, if he's confirmed, I'm happy to talk to him about this. | ||
| I think it's important that the administration and the Commerce Department receive feedback. | ||
| And, of course, I'm happy to have feedback on some of these more sensitive areas. | ||
| We have to have a steel and aluminum industry here. | ||
| We simply have to. | ||
| And it does require protection because of all the overcapacity in the world. | ||
| But to the extent there are concerns about the program, we certainly need to hear from you and your constituents. | ||
| China is a really bad actor here. | ||
| They've produced grotesque levels of overcapacity. | ||
| They're destroying the steel industry. | ||
| It's a problem that has to be dealt with. | ||
| It's not an easy one, though. | ||
| So all I'm asking is you're committed to be working very closely with us, answer our phone calls when we've got a real problem that needs to be highlighted. | ||
| Again, there's multiple uses for tariffs. | ||
| Scott Besant talked about that. | ||
| Again, to force trading partners to be fair with us to achieve other goals. | ||
| President Trump certainly used that in his first term to secure the border when Mexico wasn't cooperating with remaining Mexico for threatening tariffs, and all of a sudden we secured the border. | ||
| Another one they're talking about is revenue. | ||
| And I just want to kind of go through what the revenue amounts are you talking about. | ||
| I'm obviously highly concerned about $1.8 trillion deficits, more than $1.5 as far as the eye can see. | ||
| This could be one component, but I've heard figures of almost $1 trillion in revenue or replacing the income tax. | ||
| I'm just not seeing it. | ||
| So again, I'm an accountant. | ||
| I like numbers. | ||
| The latest trade figures I have is in 2023, we had about $3.9 trillion of imports, but of that, only about 3.1 were goods. | ||
| I'm not aware that we ever put tariffs on services, correct? | ||
| We haven't put tariffs on service. | ||
| So we got about $3.1 trillion of imports. | ||
| I mean, even a 10% across-the-board tariff would raise about $310 billion in tariff revenue. | ||
| That's not even close to replacing your income tax. | ||
| So talk to me. | ||
| Again, where am I hearing these figures? | ||
| Where is President Trump potentially getting these figures? | ||
| Do you have in your mind a goal in terms of what revenue you want to raise through some type of tariff policy? | ||
|
Combining Funding Sources
00:01:40
|
||
| Certainly. | ||
| I'm happy to talk about this. | ||
| Clearly, some of this is in the wheelhouse of the Secretary of the Treasury with respect to the income tax. | ||
| And there are conversations and initiatives going on right now about spending and what are appropriate levels of spending. | ||
| I don't think we're in a position to tomorrow fund the entire government using tariff revenue. | ||
| I don't think that's the case. | ||
| I don't think anyone thinks that. | ||
| But I think that historically we have had tariff revenues as an important part of funding the government prior to the income tax. | ||
| That was when the Federal Government was 2 percent of GDP. | ||
| Now it's 2005. | ||
| That's right, it was 25. | ||
| That's right. | ||
| So I think these things combine. | ||
| There's a question of how do we fund the government? | ||
| What should the government be paying for? | ||
| What does the budget look like? | ||
| I understand I'm repeating your question back to you essentially. | ||
| I'm not giving you a number because I don't have a number on this, but I think these are important issues to chase down. | ||
| And I think that we have to have a sense that if we're going to be using, if the President wants to use tariff revenue, it's important to make sure we have a good handle on the budget and how those revenues could be used. | ||
| And that's a conversation with Congress, obviously, as well. | ||
| But just to confirm, my numbers are largely accurate, correct? | ||
| About $3.1 trillion in goods being imported? | ||
| On import goods. | ||
| Yes, that's exactly right. | ||
| Thank you. | ||
| Thank you, Mr. Chairman. | ||
| Thank you, Senator Cassidy. | ||
|
Tillis and Young on Trade Enforcement
00:12:29
|
||
|
unidentified
|
Mr. Greer, let me first compliment you. | |
| Your kids, if this is my grandson, he'd be climbing the wall right now. | ||
|
unidentified
|
You know what I'm saying? | |
| So they've been incredibly well behaved and minimal fidgeting, if any of fidgeting at all. | ||
| So congratulations on your parenting skills. | ||
| Thank you. | ||
| Let me ask you this. | ||
| You have been concerned, expressed skepticism about the need for binding dispute mechanisms at the WTO. | ||
| But my rice producers and others have won decisions at the WTO on commitments by other countries on agricultural subsidies, and yet they are not enforced. | ||
| And so are my agricultural people just out in the cold? | ||
| There are disputes that they win, but they now don't even have a dispute. | ||
|
unidentified
|
And if they get the dispute, it's not enforced. | |
| You see, help my rice producer here. | ||
| How do we going to handle that? | ||
| No, Senator, I think you're exactly right. | ||
| And that's part of the reason why I show skepticism sometimes about the WTO, because we win a case, we get a result, and then it's not fixed or it's fixed on the surface in some other way. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Now, there's two different issues, though. | |
| One, you got to win the case, and then you've got to enforce it. | ||
| But the first step is winning the case. | ||
| And that, I say, there's been some progress in. | ||
| It's the lack of enforcement, which is critical. | ||
| But that doesn't necessarily throw out winning the case, if you follow what I'm saying. | ||
| Certainly. | ||
| I mean, listen, if you're trying to get rid of a trade barrier, there are a few ways to do it, right? | ||
| You can try to negotiate it, which is, on its face, not always successful if you don't have the leverage behind it. | ||
| If you have a case, you have some legitimate authority to go to them, say, to change it. | ||
| We also have domestic laws like Section 301 and others that can identify and detect unfair trading practices. | ||
| Now, 301 and all those are kind of like economic necessity. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Are you saying that we would use other mechanisms? | |
| We would abandon, if you will, WTO IDR, to use a bunch of abbreviations, and rely upon existing laws domestically to provide a tariff relief? | ||
| So I think we need to use any tools we have available to get relief so we can have the market action. | ||
| So I guess my question is, why would we be tossing a tool out? | ||
| If we want any tool, but we're tossing out the tool of the IDR, even if there's been faulty commitment, it seems to me like we're taking a tool and we're getting rid of it when we just said we want any tool that we can. | ||
| Well, Senator, I think part of the problems we've had with the WTO, and this has been bipartisan, I've seen letters from the chairman and the ranking member talking about how we need to make sure that the WTO doesn't undermine our trade rights and our trade laws. | ||
| Listen, if we can use the WTO effectively to negotiate rules or to get a good panel result, that's fine. | ||
| But we need to, to your point, we have to have enforcement. | ||
| And at the end of the day, what that means is USTR has to go to the country and enforce the law. | ||
| And sometimes that means imposing tariffs on them. | ||
| When we say trade enforcement, that means tariffs. | ||
| Okay, so that's my next question. | ||
|
unidentified
|
You're setting it up beautifully. | |
| About 40 percent of the imported shrimp to the United States comes from India. | ||
| Now, the EU, Japan, and the U.S. finds illegal antibiotics in their shipments. | ||
| And there's also allegations that they use forced labor at every step of the supply chain. | ||
| I think I've raised this with your former boss, with Catherine Tai, and now with you. | ||
| If we have tariffs as a tool and we can show, my gosh, there's phytosanitary issues, there is forced labor issues, and yet we are having our people driven out of business by shrimp being dumped into our country. | ||
| Would you commit to putting a slap and a tariff on the shrimp if we can show that it's being imported under those circumstances? | ||
| Well, Senator, if there's a process and Section 301 and other statutes have a process behind them, if I prejudge them, I get in trouble in the courts, right? | ||
| But if we have an investigation and it shows that there are unfair trading practices, you can certainly impose a tariff or other measures if that trade practice isn't remedied. | ||
| And I think it's really important to work with you and the shrimpers because if they feel like they're not getting the relief they need from trade remedies or other venues, then we need to explore whether it's Section 301 or other tools to make sure that we're detecting the unfairnesses and addressing it. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Sounds great. | |
| Let me echo something I think Sheldon Whitehouse brought up. | ||
|
unidentified
|
We spoke about it when we met. | |
| Right now, I'm not against tariffs. | ||
| I think just kind of across the board tariff for tariff's sake, I'm not quite so sure about. | ||
| And I'm not quite sure exactly how the law is being applied. | ||
| But one thing I am concerned about is that China is not using, not enforcing environmental regulations. | ||
| They produce a lot of sulfur dioxide, nitrous oxide, you name it, into the atmosphere, blows and the trade winds over into our country, but it lowers their cost of manufacturing by not enforcing those environmental regulations by 20 percent. | ||
| And our industry moves there because they've just lowered their manufacturing costs by 20 percent by dumping their air pollution on us. | ||
| Now, this classical economics, you attack the externality. | ||
| And I have proposed a fee on the carbon-intense product from countries which do not enforce internationally accepted norms on pollution control. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Any thoughts upon that? | |
| Well, I think you've articulated the problem statement very well. | ||
| I think there's an unlevel playing field, and I think that other countries take advantage of total lack of environmental regulations. | ||
| And we'll differ, obviously, in our country on the appropriate level of environmental regulations, but we're cleaner than these other places in the way we manufacture. | ||
| And I think it would be interesting to explore with you and the rest of the committee how do we actually address that issue. | ||
| And I think we do have to think of creative notions on how to do it. | ||
| I take that as your commitment to support the foreign pollution fee. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Thank you very much. | |
| Senator Young. | ||
| No, excuse me. | ||
| Senator Tillis. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Senator Cameron, go started. | |
| Okay, Senator Young, you're up. | ||
|
unidentified
|
All right. | |
| Well, thank you, Mr. Tillis, Mr. Chairman. | ||
| Mr. Greer, during the last administration, trade policy seemed to be treated as an abstract concept, not really an opportunity for America to gain market share, to make our people wealthier. | ||
| If anything, trade policy was something that where we were consistently in a defensive crouch. | ||
| It screamed insecurity, it screamed weakness, and I'm certainly expecting better from this muscular administration as it relates to trade policy. | ||
| Ignoring trade doesn't make us stronger. | ||
| It seeds ground. | ||
| It seeds ground when we are actively looking for partners and allies to help us shore up our supply chain by building redundancies. | ||
| It seeds all sorts of economic ground. | ||
| I've introduced a Strategic Minerals Act. | ||
| We introduced it yesterday that would give this President and future Presidents more authority when it comes to renegotiating sector-specific free trade agreements, focused exclusively, in this case, on critical minerals and rare earth elements. | ||
| We need these. | ||
| We don't have them in the ground here. | ||
| So we need to trade in order to get access to them. | ||
| My legislation is designed to bolster cooperation. | ||
| We're looking for vectors of cooperation with friends and allies to eliminate barriers, to enhance our nation's economic security so we're not starved of essentials as we were recently during the pandemic. | ||
| Mr. Greer, you've expressed support for sectoral trade agreements in the past. | ||
| If confirmed, which countries and sectors do you see as the most viable for securing market-opening trade deals that will uplift American businesses and workers? | ||
| And how will you ensure that the United States is no longer shut out of critical supply chains? | ||
| Senator, I appreciate your views on this and the conversation we had in your office. | ||
| I'll note at the top that the President's trade policy memorandum that he set out two weeks ago, one of the things he talked about was considering whether bilateral or sectoral agreements might make sense in some areas. | ||
| And I spoke earlier with Senator Johnson about some of the key supply chains that I worry about, pharmaceuticals, semiconductors, critical minerals, rare earth. | ||
| I think those all fall into that. | ||
| I want to be very careful when we're talking about trade agreements because I don't want to be in the position of going to a country that has a $50 billion trade surplus already and they want us to pull down our tariffs on trucks and cars for them. | ||
| That to me is not the kind of trade I want. | ||
| Understood. | ||
| But if there is a sectoral agreement with like-minded countries who are aligned with us on security, rule of law, things like that, those are the kinds of places where I think we should focus. | ||
| Excellent. | ||
| Well, I'm encouraged by that response. | ||
| Given the limitations of executive agreements, they only last for the duration of a President's term. | ||
| In this case, it would, of course, be four years. | ||
| And the necessity of congressional approval for binding market access deals, do you believe USTR would be in a stronger position if Congress provided a clear legislative framework similar to TPA, but tailored for sector-specific agreements like those for critical minerals? | ||
| Senator, I want to think about that because I think that's creative. | ||
| I think that any trade agreement that the USTR might bring to Congress, I want it to be, I want to have full support, right? | ||
| I mean, at the USMCA, we had 89 senators vote for it. | ||
| We had almost 400 folks in the House vote for it. | ||
| That's the level of support I want. | ||
| And if Congress thinks that a legislative framework will help with that, I'm happy to talk about what makes sense. | ||
| Okay. | ||
| You know, a related topic of great interest to me because the United States is so sophisticated when it comes to the digital economy is digital trade. | ||
| There's a geopolitical overlay to our engagement with other countries, our tearing down barriers to our digital products. | ||
| And that overlay is essentially if we embed in our products our values, privacy rights, consumer protection, transparency, all the things Americans value, then if the Chinese or others want to sell into our large economy allied countries or the United States, they need to abide by our values. | ||
| So that's really exciting. | ||
| But there's, of course, an economic dimension to this as well. | ||
| Here again, the previous administration did nothing, nothing, despite bipartisan support for expanding digital trade access. | ||
| Instead, they played defense the whole time, thinking trade was a four-letter word. | ||
| Mr. Greer, if confirmed, how will you work to prevent the discriminatory treatment of U.S. companies in key global markets and ensure they're competing in a level playing field when it comes to digital trade? | ||
| Senator, in the first Trump administration, we took action under Section 301 to combat discriminatory digital services taxes. | ||
| I know there are many jurisdictions in the world right now that are doing this and other measures to try to control the business models of our digital champions. | ||
| And I want to make sure that if anybody's regulating our digital companies, it's going to be us. | ||
| And they can't discriminate against it. | ||
| And I think that we need to explore using Section 301 and other measures to make sure that we're able to stay competitive globally. | ||
| And I look forward to working with you towards that objective. | ||
| Thank you so much. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Thank you. | |
| All right. | ||
| And now, Senator Tillis. | ||
| Thank you, Mr. Chairman. | ||
| Little Jameson and Pearl, my staff, are bringing you all a goodie bag. | ||
| Jameson, you need to know that I have three big sisters. | ||
| They're awesome, although sometimes they can be bad. | ||
| And Pearl, you get to share that with your sisters, but you have control as a little sister. | ||
| Mr. Greer, thank you for being here. | ||
| You've done an extraordinary job, and there's nothing I can do in five minutes that would do justice to all the discussions I want to have with you about trade policy. | ||
| North Carolina, more than 50 percent of our trade is Canada, Mexico, and China. | ||
|
Holding Colombia Accountable
00:11:24
|
||
| And yet, I am wide open to some of these innovative ideas to hold these countries accountable because it could be some short-term uncertainty and gain with the benefit of long-term pain, with the benefit of long-term gain. | ||
| Just one question. | ||
| Mr. Chair, I would like, with unanimous consent, to submit this commentary from Mr. Greer just recently on the posture that we should have towards South Korea. | ||
| So, without objection, I actually am going to give you a break. | ||
| But all of the opening comments about the president creating uncertainty, okay, let's talk about that. | ||
| He threatened Colombia if they didn't start working with the United States that he was going to impose tariffs on them. | ||
| President Petro said no way. | ||
| He decided he was going to go to the brink because of the illegal immigrants coming from Colombia. | ||
| And it turns out that I know people said that the president blinked, but in this case, it wasn't President Trump. | ||
| It was President Petro, and now he's showing some respect for our laws. | ||
| President Petro, who was elected in 22, should probably also pay attention to an environment that would force families to make the dangerous trip all the way from Colombia to pay a cartel to come across the border to come to the United States. | ||
| Maybe that president should not only work with the United States, but understand he's got fundamental problems that would cause responsible parents to do that. | ||
| So get to work at home. | ||
| Mexico, same thing. | ||
| President threatened the uncertainty that was created over the course of four days created the horrible consequence of 10,000 troops going to the northern border of Mexico. | ||
| I hope the president threatens tariffs again and maybe send 5,000 troops to the southern border of Mexico so those people in Colombia cannot make that dangerous trip. | ||
| Canada. | ||
| If Canada had paid its fair share to NATO, I'm the Republican leader of the Senate NATO Observer Group, have been since 2018. | ||
| If Canada in this century alone, the last 24 years had paid their fair share to NATO, we would have a third of a trillion dollars in modernization and readiness that doesn't exist because they are a laggard. | ||
| They are also taking advantage of our border and they are taking advantage of trade agreements. | ||
| Putting them on notice, I think, is necessary because they're acting like petulant children because they're north of the U.S. border, the most powerful nation on earth, and they're taking us for granted. | ||
| And I think you're going to find very specific examples of where they've done that on trade, and that's where we need to tailor, I think, our agreements. | ||
| South Korea, you've very articulately in your commentary have identified the threat there and the way that they're trying to counter unfairly, I believe, our big tech and high-tech and general businesses and some in their own country, and silent on China. | ||
| And then finally, China. | ||
| You know, at the end of the day, we know in North Carolina, if we get into a broad-based trade war, we're going to get damaged, particularly in North Carolina. | ||
| They're going to close off access to their markets for pork and chicken, et cetera. | ||
| But we have to hold them accountable, folks. | ||
| I have seen counterfeit goods that have killed people coming from China. | ||
| They're stealing our intellectual property theft. | ||
| They're stealing our ideas. | ||
| They're making it cheaper. | ||
| They're, in many instances, less safe. | ||
| And I believe that under your leadership, we will tailor it. | ||
| Everybody that's got this false narrative that we're just going to do blunt force tariffs across the board, it's illogical. | ||
| If we did that, we're going to have to discount, to Senator Johnson's question, discount the net revenue because it's got to be net of retaliation. | ||
| But I have confidence in you, Mr. Greer, to provide the advice to the president to get this right. | ||
| It is time for Europe. | ||
| It is time for Canada. | ||
| It is time for China. | ||
| It is time for the countries of South America to understand where we've been treated unfairly. | ||
| We no longer will. | ||
| And I look forward to supporting your nomination. | ||
| And kids, your dad's done a good job. | ||
| Thank you very much, Senator, for all of that and for the kindness to my children. | ||
| Senator Marshall. | ||
| Well, thank you, Mr. Chairman and Ranking Member. | ||
| I guess I'm it today. | ||
| So I think, first of all, it's great to, once again, that both sides of this dais share many of the same goals. | ||
| I heard my colleagues say that they want an aggressive trade agenda to open up more free markets. | ||
| So that's exciting to hear. | ||
| And I would add with that, I assume they also want them to have fair and reciprocal trade agreements as well. | ||
| So we're assuming that we share the same goal. | ||
| Under President Trump, he gave us USMCA. | ||
| He gave us South Korea, an improved Japanese trade agreement, so important to American beef, and China phase one. | ||
| Mr. Greer, what trade agreements were accomplished under Joe Biden? | ||
| Senator, I'm not aware of any. | ||
| Okay. | ||
| I want to compare and contrast a little bit here more. | ||
| Let's talk about Mexico. | ||
| I think it's one of the simpler ones to understand. | ||
| Again, thanks to President Trump's USMCA trade agreement, Mexico and Canada supplanted China as a number one trade partner for Kansas agriculture, many of our materials as well. | ||
| But under Joe Biden, Mexico undermined American farms. | ||
| He harmed commerce and he bullied U.S. companies. | ||
| He shut down the GMO corn exports, forcing a huge dispute. | ||
| Mexico hampered U.S. energy protection under Joe Biden. | ||
| And Mexico ceased a U.S. mining company's operation near Cozumel. | ||
| What can you do? | ||
| What can we do to reverse this behavior? | ||
| Well, Senator, before I answer that, I just have to point out that I do have one child that was born in Kansas. | ||
| That's great to hear. | ||
| And maybe had something to do with your time in the Air Force. | ||
| That's exactly right. | ||
| Well, you're an honorary Kansas and you can wear your Chiefs' jersey. | ||
| You can wear a Jayhawk jersey. | ||
| Any of those things are applicable. | ||
| Which one is it? | ||
| Well, I have a Sonora, and I have a Wichita State Shocker's t-shirt that I have. | ||
| There we go. | ||
| So, with respect to your question, any trade agreement we have is only as valuable as the enforcement behind it. | ||
| And so, my view is all these issues you talked about with Mexico, whether it be energy or corn, et cetera, we need to enforce that. | ||
| I know that there's a case that was done on the corn issue. | ||
| I'm going to enforce that. | ||
| I know that there were consultations open on energy, and we're going to bring that up with the Mexicans as well. | ||
| It's important, listen, good fences make good neighbors. | ||
| If we want to have good ongoing trade relations with folks, we have to hold them accountable. | ||
| That's right. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Right. | |
| Let's talk about biofuels for a second. | ||
| I've never seen such an uneven playing field for American biofuels. | ||
| U.S. is subject to 18 percent tariffs going into Brazil with biofuels, yet Brazil enjoys virtually free access to the U.S. | ||
| And in many cases, thanks to some scientific voodoo, they're actually giving Brazil a preference over American biofuels as well. | ||
| The EU continues to be protectionists against U.S. ethanol. | ||
| Chinese used coil, used cooking oil exports. | ||
| You're familiar with how they're abusing that. | ||
| You would think that if we're going to give tax credits, we would make sure they're not going to benefit foreign entities, especially those who wish to harm us. | ||
| What can you do to help the biofuels industry and try to level that playing field? | ||
| Well, Senator, this is the specific kind of unfairness that drives me crazy. | ||
| And it's not just me, the President himself. | ||
| He sees these kinds of unfairnesses and the unlevel playing field. | ||
| And it's so obvious, it's so blatant, and it's gone on for so long. | ||
| Again, in the first instance, you can certainly go to somebody like the Brazilians and say you need to fix this, but it has to be followed up with or else, right? | ||
| I mean, that's a little crude, but we need to have leverage, and if we need to gain leverage by taking investigatory actions or other actions, we'll do that. | ||
| It would be much better to do this on a negotiating basis, but we'll do whatever we need to do to try to fix this situation. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Great. | |
| Let's talk about China for a second. | ||
| There's so many more things than just trade barriers or tariff barriers. | ||
| There's many, many non-tariff barriers. | ||
| I'm sure people have highlighted them when I was gone here. | ||
| They're stealing seed genetics from us. | ||
| They're blocking import and feed additive technologies and beef. | ||
| They're blocking chicken exports from 42 states because of HPAI. | ||
| They've committed to substantial ethanol purchase, but never followed through. | ||
| And I could go on. | ||
| In contrast to the Biden administration, how can we build on President Trump's success under Phase 1 with China? | ||
| Well, we need to start by reviewing it and actually assessing whether or not the Chinese have complied with it or to what degree. | ||
| In fact, the President has already directed the Office of the USTR to do this. | ||
| And if you go to their website, there's like an announcement that says that they're entrained doing this. | ||
| So I think in the first instance, you have to have a very clear assessment because we don't just want to pound our fist and have rhetoric. | ||
| We want to be able to very clearly see where they did or did not comply. | ||
| And then from there, you move to dispute settlement and you move to enforcement if you need to. | ||
| And again, hopefully, this is an area where countries will understand the unfairness and change because they know that President Trump is serious about this, that I'm serious about this. | ||
| And if they don't, then you move for that last part of enforcement. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Great. | |
| Great. | ||
| If I can just finish with this, as you all know, we have an almost $1 trillion trade deficit in this country, as well as national security issues. | ||
| And I appreciate President Trump this drug war that we're having with Mexico and Canada and China over the fentanyl precursors, especially. | ||
| I greatly appreciate him prioritizing the security of our families. | ||
| And if he has to use tariffs for that, I understand. | ||
| I also believe though these tariffs will bring jobs back to America as well. | ||
| And that's another way that we can use this. | ||
| You know, one thing I would dispute, and we would disagree with this with my friends across the aisle when they say that American consumers will pay for these tariffs. | ||
| You know, under President Trump, he used tariffs, but we saw minimal inflation. | ||
| So at the end of the day, those tariffs were not passed on to America in the big picture. | ||
| I'm sure you cannot find isolation as that you could do that. | ||
| But to me, the big picture is for one reason or another, those tariffs were used properly, and we were able to not pass that on to American consumers. | ||
| Mr. Greer, is there a way to do that going forward as well, to effectively use these tariffs as a weapon, as a tool? | ||
| Yes, I agree 100% with that. | ||
| What we learned from the first term is that President Trump and his economic team is very good at managing the economy. | ||
|
Believe in Strong Trade Action
00:06:26
|
||
| And we saw real median household income go up by $7,000 over three years before the pandemic hit. | ||
| And this was at a time when we were imposing tariffs in a way we hadn't done in many years. | ||
| And when we look at inflation under the Biden administration that happened in 2022, it wasn't about tariffs. | ||
| It was about health care and housing and food, things we don't import from China, right? | ||
| So we know that we can manage this. | ||
| We know we have a strong economic team. | ||
| And if I'm confirmed, I expect to be able to take strong trade action while helping ensure that the economy is growing for average Americans. | ||
| Thank you so much, Mr. Greer. | ||
| Thank you, Mr. Chairman, Ranking Member. | ||
| Thank you. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Thank you. | |
| Senator Scott. | ||
| Thank you, Mr. Greer. | ||
| Welcome to the committee. | ||
| Good to see you here. | ||
| I'm a little concerned that what I feel like I heard the exchange between you and Mr. Marshall was somehow Mr. Marshall providing some incentive to what's the word I was looking for here? | ||
| Brainwash a young girl about being a Kansas Jayhawk fan or a Kansas City Chiefs fan. | ||
| I know that you're supporting the Eagles. | ||
| Is that what I understand for the Silverbowl? | ||
| Yes, I thought that was the Eagles jersey you have on there, sir. | ||
| I just want to make sure, Ms. Greer, you realize that the Garolina Gamecocks is also a very good school, fine school for kids to follow. | ||
| And we have an Air Force base there. | ||
| I know you're no longer in the Air Force, but just realize that Kansas is a fine state. | ||
| We like Kansans, and we hope that all things go well later on this week. | ||
| But in the end, I would be remiss if I did not mention the Carolina Gamecocks with that many kids who need to be educated somewhere in the near future. | ||
| Senator, I'll be happy to work with you on collegiate allegiances. | ||
| Thank you, sir. | ||
| Appreciate that. | ||
| Second question for you, sir. | ||
| Is expanding market access for American-made goods is critical to our economic strength, frankly, and our competitiveness. | ||
| 95% of our customers are outside of our nation, as we represent about 5% of the world's population. | ||
| South Carolina, we have about $36.4 billion of manufactured goods and products that leave our state supporting 112,000 jobs that find a home someplace around the world. | ||
| Our agricultural goods, $1.2 billion. | ||
| Access to the world's market is incredibly important. | ||
| We believe that they create good paying jobs in South Carolina. | ||
| Also, believe they create great paying jobs across this country as we took the aggregate value of those goods and services in other states. | ||
| How do you plan to secure this market access with other countries in the first 100 days as our new thank you, Senator? | ||
| I would say that when I look at some of our largest trading partners, they are our largest trading partners because we import so much from them. | ||
| We have somebody like Vietnam, for example, where they've reached their historical high trade deficit in goods with us, over $100 billion. | ||
| This is something that has grown substantially. | ||
| So we have a lot of trading partners like this that enjoy very substantial trade access in the United States, and we don't have reciprocal access going the other way. | ||
| And to me, this is a huge problem. | ||
| And it's a problem for our workers. | ||
| It's a problem for exporters and manufacturers in places like South Carolina and elsewhere. | ||
| So I think in short order, we will be approaching these countries to assess their unfair trade practices and why it is that they are able to have and maintain these huge trade imbalances with us over many years. | ||
| That doesn't make sense when we have so many products where we are competitive and we should be able to ship overseas. | ||
| And again, I've mentioned this before. | ||
| I expect the Trump administration will have competitive energy policy, tax policy, regulatory policy, permitting policies. | ||
| That will only help us be more competitive in these foreign markets. | ||
| But we have to open them. | ||
| And I think we need, I need, if I'm confirmed, I have to be able to go to these countries and explain to them that if they want to enjoy continued market access to the United States, we need to have better reciprocity. | ||
| It seems to me that the President's tariffs approach, really one has to do with punishment, the other has to do with right-sizing our approach to a global economy, and both seem to have the American consumer in mind and our national security in mind as well. | ||
| And the more efforts we see from the President in this direction, it seems like his ability to recalibrate the global system and, frankly, to make it more responsive to Americans net positive long term. | ||
| Senator, I agree with you. | ||
| I couldn't put it better myself. | ||
| I think that's exactly the way we need to do this. | ||
| This is the time to restructure the global trading system to better serve American workers and businesses. | ||
| It also seems to me that there are countries like China. | ||
| I'm not sure the politically right way to say this, but they lie, they cheat, they steal. | ||
| And yet, with the World Trade Organization, they still have a most favored nation status. | ||
| What should we do about that, and how do we re-examine that and try to figure out a right-size that relationship as well? | ||
| Senator, I think that's really important because I think if you look historically, granting China permanent normal trade relations is one major cause of why we're in the situation we're in now with unbalanced trade. | ||
| And I think it's important for Congress and the administration to work together about how that looks going forward. | ||
| In fact, it's something that the President put in his trade policy memorandum. | ||
| He specifically said, consider the legislative options related to permanent normal trade relations. | ||
| There are a lot of ways to go about it. | ||
| Obviously, you want to make sure that the economy is doing well and we have growth, but we want to make sure that we are not dependent on China for strategic goods, that our farmers aren't so dependent on them that they can be victims of economic coercion. | ||
| So I would love to have a conversation with you about that. | ||
| Mr. Chairman, my last comment really doesn't necessarily need a response, but from my perspective, our first weapon for national security ought to be an economic weapon, a non-kinetic option. | ||
| And to the extent that we deploy that weapon in the most effective way possible, we keep more Americans safe, keep our soldiers at home, and frankly, I think it recalibrates or it repositions America as a city on the hill. | ||
| And I hope that we engage in the most effective approach and use of that economic weapon that we possibly can. | ||
|
U.S. Trade Rep's Role
00:12:05
|
||
| I agree with that. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Thank you. | |
| Thank you, Senator Barrazo. | ||
| Thank you, Mr. Chairman. | ||
| Mr. Gere, thanks so much for being here, and thanks so much for taking the time to visit in my office. | ||
| As U.S. Trade Rep, you are going to be the tip of the sphere in advancing President Trump's pro-growth and pro-worker trade agreement agenda. | ||
| You are going to be working to open up new markets for our nation, for our producers, including for Wyoming mining, Wyoming energy production, and for our farmers and ranchers. | ||
| You'll also be protecting America's interests and fighting back against abusive trade practices from foreign adversaries that undermine U.S. industries and our critical supply chains. | ||
| You have a big task in front of you, as we discussed. | ||
|
unidentified
|
We're all counting on you. | |
| And I have no doubt that, given your experience serving President Trump as chief of staff at the U.S. Trade Rep during his first term, that you're ready and you're equipped to lead the charge on behalf of the nation's trade agenda for his second term. | ||
| In regard to market access, I know we all talk a lot about market access today. | ||
| We also talk about market access when we met in my office. | ||
| I mentioned to you the importance of opening up new opportunities for the industries from my home state of Wyoming. | ||
| We talked about how opening up markets in Japan for U.S. beef was a big win for Wyoming ranchers. | ||
| Told you about how Wyoming is an energy powerhouse and the nation's energy breadbasket. | ||
| Wyoming also plays a major part in the world providing abundant, affordable energy to our allies around the world. | ||
| We also have huge mineral deposits in Wyoming, a mineral called Trona, which is refined into soda ash, a basic chemical building block used in manufacturing lots and lots of products, including glass, detergent, pharmaceuticals, whether it's oil, natural gas, coal, critical minerals, and agriculture. | ||
| Wyoming's economy, the U.S. economy, is going to greatly benefit as we export resources to new markets. | ||
| So as U.S. trade rep, what types of emphasis are you going to place on opening up new markets for U.S. exporters and certainly for Wyoming producers? | ||
| Well, Senator, thank you for that. | ||
| And I agree with you on the mineral wealth and other wealth that Wyoming has to share with the country and the rest of the world. | ||
| I expect that going forward we want to be in a position where our economy is very strong. | ||
| So I don't think about trade policy as an end and of itself, right? | ||
| I think of trade policy as something that's going to result in higher wages and higher incomes for Americans and their families. | ||
| And that means a lot of things. | ||
| It means we need to make more here. | ||
| It means we need to export more as well. | ||
| As everyone knows, I have concerns about the trade deficit. | ||
| I think it's unsustainable and I think it's harmful. | ||
| But there are several ways to get at it. | ||
| One is by ensuring that there are unfair trade practices with imports, but another important way is by making sure that we have other markets where we can export our goods and services. | ||
| Could you add into it in terms of maybe how you would do it differently than what we last saw the last four years under the Biden administration? | ||
| I thought they felt way short in opening access to new markets. | ||
| Well, for me, Senator, it's of critical importance to, at a very early stage, and I hope the Office of the USTR has already started in this. | ||
| It's very important at an early stage to figure out exactly what we want from these other countries. | ||
| Sometimes I hear people say, let's do a deal. | ||
| And I say, well, what's the deal? | ||
| What's the deal that you want, right? | ||
| So the more specificity that I can obtain, if I'm confirmed, from our industries and from our workers about what kind of market access we need and where, it'll make my job all that much easier to be able to go in and go to these countries that have enjoyed market access to the United States for a very long time, but who maintain high tariff and non-tariff barriers and say, this is what we need, and this is what we expect. | ||
| And if you're going to continue to have good relations economically with the United States, we are going to expect access. | ||
| And this isn't about muscling people or being a bully. | ||
| It's about having fair and reciprocal access. | ||
|
unidentified
|
I want to talk about Mexico and U.S.MCA commitments. | |
| So Mexico has repeatedly violated the historic United States-Mexico-Canada agreement. | ||
| They were ruled by a dispute panel to be in violation of the U.S. MCA with respect to U.S. corn. | ||
| Mexico has taken hostile actions towards seizing assets of U.S. companies. | ||
| An issue that I've weighed in on over the years has been Mexico's hostility toward U.S. energy companies. | ||
| Mexico's previous president discriminated against U.S. energy producers, favoring his state-owned utilities and oil and gas companies. | ||
| The Biden administration, I think, fell well short of fully protecting U.S. energy producers. | ||
| And Biden's U.S. trade rep failed tremendously to make any meaningful progress. | ||
| That's left great uncertainty, jeopardized lots and lots of money in U.S. investment. | ||
| First, Mr. Chairman, I'd like to enter into the record a bicameral letter that I led on the need to address this matter. | ||
| Without objection. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Thank you, Mr. President. | |
| And so the question is, going forward under the Trump administration and with Mexico's new president, who is now in office, how important it's going to be for you, U.S. Trade Rep, to help protect U.S. energy companies and their investments. | ||
| Senator, I share all of the concerns that you just laid out. | ||
| American energy companies, we're the cleanest companies. | ||
| Our labor practices are good. | ||
| Our governance practices are excellent. | ||
| And that's why our energy companies are partners of choice all over the world. | ||
| And so I will expect, at a very early stage, to be able to go in and look at where the Mexicans have been discriminatory against us or taken unfair action or favored their state-owned industries over ours where they have violated the USMCA and to move forward. | ||
| If it requires consultations, we'll do that. | ||
| If it requires enforcement action, we'll do that. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. | |
| Thank you. | ||
| And Mr. Greer, we're getting close. | ||
| Senator Wyden has another question, and I believe you'll wrap up and then I'll wrap up and we'll be done, right? | ||
| You will be liberated soon, Mr. Greer. | ||
| Go ahead, Senator Wyden. | ||
| My question to you, and I'm going to get into one quick area and then make a short closing statement, deals with forced labor. | ||
| And forced labor and doing everything we can to block it is, of course, the morally right thing to do, but it's also enormously important to American businesses and American workers. | ||
| And in fact, we've on a bipartisan basis thought that was so important. | ||
| USTR sits on the primary enforcement committee. | ||
| It's called the U.S. Forced Labor Enforcement Committee. | ||
| And I would like to know how you think we're going to be able to wage this fight because U.S. AID and the foreign players are having their roles reversed under what we have been talking about here in the last couple of weeks. | ||
| So I'd like for your thoughts on what's going to be done to have an aggressive effort against forced labor, which I think is an important effort for the United States for the reasons I just mentioned. | ||
| So Senator, I agree. | ||
| I agree entirely with you on the forced labor issue, both morally and economically. | ||
| U.S. Customs and Border Protection is tasked with enforcement, and I know that they've been escalating that in recent years. | ||
| And I assume that direction is going to continue. | ||
| It's not my agency, but it's an area where I'm very concerned. | ||
| And I think I have equities there if I'm confirmed. | ||
| Why don't you get back to me in writing on this? | ||
| Because you all do have an enforcement role. | ||
| That's why I mentioned the organization. | ||
| And so if you tell me it's somebody else, that concerns me because I want to know how we're going to be able to push at least as hard as we do today rather than go backward on forced labor. | ||
| Here's my last thought. | ||
| I still haven't heard from you over the course of the close to three hours, despite my repeated requests, a single good economic argument for these sweeping universal tariffs. | ||
| And in fact, some of my colleagues who haven't really had a chance to get into this over the years said, well, that's what we did under Trump 1. | ||
| That is not what was done under Trump 1. | ||
| In fact, Donald Trump said specifically he wanted to go way beyond what was done in his first term to these universal tariffs. | ||
| So I want to leave you with this. | ||
| I feel so strongly about trade being done right. | ||
| I want to continue to discuss these issues with you. | ||
| I'm not convinced we're there yet because this is particularly critical to our competitiveness, to inflation, to what it's going to mean for working people and small businesses. | ||
| And as I say, I consider this absolutely a prerequisite to doing trade right. | ||
| And we have not gotten, in my view, a sufficient answer on the question of our time, which was the big change in policy from Trump 1 to Trump 2, because they're not, as my colleagues suggested, well, the same thing. | ||
| They're not. | ||
| This has much more extensive consequences. | ||
| And I'll just close by way of saying I was supportive of the targeted tariff approach in Trump 1. | ||
| And I think you might have been in my office with Bob Lighthizer when we talked about it, because then we said we're going to go in and really laser out an approach that ensures that we get the upside of a tariff without the anti-consumer downside. | ||
| So I want to invite you to continue to work with me and my office to see if we can get through this and come to an agreement in terms of how it's going to be pursued at your office, because I think this is central. | ||
| And I remember working with you in the past on a number of questions this morning. | ||
| Your views and mind coincide. | ||
| But on this question of what's going to happen with a big universal tariff, this is brand new ground. | ||
| I don't think it exists in history. | ||
| It wasn't part of Trump 1, but it's got the potential to do a lot of damage to the American people and the American economy. | ||
| You don't want that. | ||
| I don't want that. | ||
| Let's continue to talk about it. | ||
| Thank you, Mr. Chairman. | ||
| Thank you, Senator Wyden. | ||
| And Mr. Greer, again, thank you for appearing. | ||
| As Senator Wyden indicated, you've been here nearly three hours now and have responded, as you have in previous meetings with members of the committee to their questions very well. | ||
| And I think you've done a phenomenally good job. | ||
| You have shown that you are completely capable and qualified for this job. | ||
| I look forward to working with you and making sure that we get your nomination confirmed as soon as possible. | ||
| With that, I would like to remind my colleagues that the deadline for submitting any questions for the record is 5 p.m. today. | ||
| the finance committee will stand adjourned. | ||
|
Trump's Buyout Program Halted
00:00:42
|
||
|
unidentified
|
A federal judge in Massachusetts has put a temporary hold on implementing the Trump administration's federal employee buyout program. | |
| Eligible employees had until midnight tonight to decide whether they would take the offer, which promised paid salary and benefits through the end of September for those who voluntarily resigned. | ||
| As many as 40,000 federal workers have already accepted the buyout offer, according to the White House. | ||
| Reuters notes that Judge George O'Toole could opt to delay the buyout further or block it on a more permanent basis when he next considers the legal challenge by the unions at a hearing on Monday. | ||