Congressional Votes on Free Trade Agreements and Trade Promotion Authority

Changes from December 28, 2021 to June 29, 2023

This page shows textual changes in the document between the two versions indicated in the dates above. Textual matter removed in the later version is indicated with ~~red strikethrough~~ and textual matter added in the later version is indicated with blue.

Major Votes on Free Trade Agreements and
~~December 28, 2021~~June 29, 2023
Trade Promotion Authority
Keigh E. Hammond
Congress plays a key role in shaping U.S. trade policy. While the President has authority Congress plays a key role in shaping U.S. trade policy. While the President has authority
to Senior Research Librarian Senior Research Librarian
to negotiate with foreign countries, Congress has sole constitutional authority to regulate negotiate with foreign countries, Congress has sole constitutional authority to regulate

international trade. Since 1934, Congress has periodically delegated certain trade international trade. Since 1934, Congress has periodically delegated certain trade
agreement negotiating authorities to the President and has required congressional agreement negotiating authorities to the President and has required congressional

approval of some trade approval of some trade agreements through implementing legislation. Since 1979, agreements through implementing legislation. Since 1979,
Congress has passed 17 implementing measures for FTAs and multilateral trade agreements. Most recently, Congress has passed 17 implementing measures for FTAs and multilateral trade agreements. Most recently,
Congress considered and approved the United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement (USMCA) (P.L. 116-113). Congress considered and approved the United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement (USMCA) (P.L. 116-113).
Congress also periodically considers legislation to grant Trade Promotion Authority (TPA) to the President for Congress also periodically considers legislation to grant Trade Promotion Authority (TPA) to the President for
limited time periods. Through TPA legislation, Congress delegates certain trade agreement negotiating authorities limited time periods. Through TPA legislation, Congress delegates certain trade agreement negotiating authorities
to the President; defines specific trade negotiation objectives; and sets consultation requirements. TPA legislation to the President; defines specific trade negotiation objectives; and sets consultation requirements. TPA legislation
also outlines the terms, requirements, and procedures for FTA implementing legislation to receive expedited also outlines the terms, requirements, and procedures for FTA implementing legislation to receive expedited
consideration in Congress. All but one of the 17 trade agreements approved by Congress since 1979 were consideration in Congress. All but one of the 17 trade agreements approved by Congress since 1979 were
considered in Congress under TPA. considered in Congress under TPA.
Since 1979, Congress has passed six measures extending TPA for limited time periods. The most recent TPA was Since 1979, Congress has passed six measures extending TPA for limited time periods. The most recent TPA was
passed in 2015; this authority expired on July 1, 2021, potentially complicating the Administration’s future trade passed in 2015; this authority expired on July 1, 2021, potentially complicating the Administration’s future trade
negotiations. As with many international trade issues, TPA has been politically contentious over time, resulting in negotiations. As with many international trade issues, TPA has been politically contentious over time, resulting in
vigorous debate and three notable lapses in authority, including the current lapse. vigorous debate and three notable lapses in authority, including the current lapse.
Congress also has a specific role in determining U.S. membership to the World Trade Organization (WTO). Congress also has a specific role in determining U.S. membership to the World Trade Organization (WTO).
Congress first approved U.S. membership in the international organization in 1994, by passing the implementing Congress first approved U.S. membership in the international organization in 1994, by passing the implementing
legislation for the WTO Uruguay Round Agreements. The implementing legislation also established a procedure legislation for the WTO Uruguay Round Agreements. The implementing legislation also established a procedure
whereby Congress can withdraw the United States from the WTO through a joint resolution. In the 116th whereby Congress can withdraw the United States from the WTO through a joint resolution. In the 116th
Congress, two resolutions were introduced to withdraw U.S. membership from the WTO; neither were brought up Congress, two resolutions were introduced to withdraw U.S. membership from the WTO; neither were brought up
for a vote. for a vote.
The following report and tables compile the final congressional votes on FTAs, TPA, and U.S membership to the The following report and tables compile the final congressional votes on FTAs, TPA, and U.S membership to the
WTO. WTO.

Congressional Research Service Congressional Research Service

link to page 6 link to page 8 link to page 6 link to page 8 Major Votes on Free Trade Agreements and Trade Promotion Authority

Congress and Free Trade Agreements
This report compiles the final congressional votes on free trade agreements (FTAs), trade This report compiles the final congressional votes on free trade agreements (FTAs), trade
promotion authority (TPA), and U.S membership to the World Trade Organization (WTO). promotion authority (TPA), and U.S membership to the World Trade Organization (WTO).
In the past 30 years, the United States has pursued bilateral, regional, and multilateral trade In the past 30 years, the United States has pursued bilateral, regional, and multilateral trade
agreements in an attempt to liberalize markets and reduce trade and investment barriers. Congress agreements in an attempt to liberalize markets and reduce trade and investment barriers. Congress
has played a central role in shaping this trade policy. Congress—through debate and legislation—has played a central role in shaping this trade policy. Congress—through debate and legislation—
defines trade negotiation priorities and approves FTAs. Congress also helps oversee agreements’ defines trade negotiation priorities and approves FTAs. Congress also helps oversee agreements’
implementation and enforcement. implementation and enforcement.
While the President has the authority to negotiate treaties with foreign countries, Congress has While the President has the authority to negotiate treaties with foreign countries, Congress has
sole constitutional authority to regulate international trade.1 Since 1934, Congress has sole constitutional authority to regulate international trade.1 Since 1934, Congress has
periodically delegated some authority to negotiate trade agreements to the President. In the Trade periodically delegated some authority to negotiate trade agreements to the President. In the Trade
Act of 1974, Congress outlined many of the congressional and executive roles regarding trade Act of 1974, Congress outlined many of the congressional and executive roles regarding trade
agreements; Congress delegated negotiation authority to the President, but required congressional agreements; Congress delegated negotiation authority to the President, but required congressional
approval (through implementation legislation) of FTAs. Congress also created a process to allow approval (through implementation legislation) of FTAs. Congress also created a process to allow
for expedited consideration of trade agreement implementing legislation, provided that the for expedited consideration of trade agreement implementing legislation, provided that the
President observe certain statutory requirements.2 This expedient consideration is known as TPA President observe certain statutory requirements.2 This expedient consideration is known as TPA
or, formerly, “fast-track” consideration.3 or, formerly, “fast-track” consideration.3
Free Trade Agreements: Bilateral and Regional
The United States is currently party to 12 bilateral FTAs (with Australia, Bahrain, Chile, The United States is currently party to 12 bilateral FTAs (with Australia, Bahrain, Chile,
Colombia, Israel, Jordan, South Korea, Morocco, Oman, Panama, Peru, and Singapore) and to Colombia, Israel, Jordan, South Korea, Morocco, Oman, Panama, Peru, and Singapore) and to
two regional FTAs (United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement (USMCA) and the Dominican two regional FTAs (United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement (USMCA) and the Dominican
Republic-Central America-United States Free Trade Agreement (CAFTA-DR)). (For a list and Republic-Central America-United States Free Trade Agreement (CAFTA-DR)). (For a list and
timeline of FTAs, seetimeline of FTAs, see Table 1. For a compilation of final congressional votes on FTAs considered a compilation of final congressional votes on FTAs considered
by Congress, by Congress, ~~see~~see Table 2.) These FTAs are considered comprehensive trade agreements, covering These FTAs are considered comprehensive trade agreements, covering
"“substantially all tradesubstantially all trade"” between partners. The United States has also negotiated more limited between partners. The United States has also negotiated more limited
agreements that have focused on select bilateral trade and tariff issues; recent examples include agreements that have focused on select bilateral trade and tariff issues; recent examples include
the the ~~“phase one” agreements with China and Japan and a limited tariff agreement with the~~
~~European Union~~partial scope agreements with Japan on critical minerals (2023), digital trade (2020), and limited tariff reductions (2020), as well as the 2020 “phase one” agreement with China. This report does not cover these limited-scope agreements, as they have not . This report does not cover these limited-scope agreements, as they have not
required congressional approval or required congressional approval or ~~non-tariff-related~~ changes to U.S. law.4 changes to U.S. law.4

1 Article I, Section 8, of the 1 Article I, Section 8, of the U.S. Constitution Constitution ~~gives~~authorizes Congress Congress ~~the power~~ “To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations“To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations ...... ” ”
and “To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts, and Excises....and “To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts, and Excises.... ” ”
2 Section 102 of the Trade Act of 1974, as amended. 2 Section 102 of the Trade Act of 1974, as amended.
3 For more on Trade Promotion Authority see CRS In Focus IF10038, 3 For more on Trade Promotion Authority see CRS In Focus IF10038, Trade Promotion Authority (TPA), by , by ~~Ian F.~~
~~Fergusson; CRS Report RL33743, Trade Promotion Authority (TPA) and the Role of Congress in Trade Policy, by Ian~~
~~F. Fergusson; and CRS Report R43491, Trade Promotion Authority (TPA): Frequently Asked Questions, by Ian F.~~
~~Fergusson and Christopher M. Davis.~~
~~4 For more on the recent limited scope agreements with China and Japan, see: CRS Insight IN11208,~~ ~~U.S. Signs Phase~~
~~One Trade Deal with China, by Karen M. Sutter and CRS Report R46140, “Stage One” U.S.-Japan Trade Agreements,~~
~~coordinated by Brock R. Williams. For more on the evolution of U.S. trade agreement policy and presidential~~
~~authorities, see CRS Report R45198, U.S. and Global Trade Agreements: Issues for Congress, by Brock R. Williams,~~
~~and CRS In Focus IF11400, Presidential Authority to Address Tariff Barriers in Trade Agreements, by Christopher A.~~
~~Casey and Brandon J. Murrill.~~
Christopher A. Casey and Cathleen D. Cimino-Isaacs, Trade Promotion Authority (TPA), by Christopher A. Casey and Cathleen D. Cimino-Isaacs, and CRS Report RL33743, Trade Promotion Authority (TPA) and the Role of Congress in Trade Policy, by Cathleen D. Cimino-Isaacs and Christopher A. Casey. 4 For more on presidential authorities for limited scope trade agreements, see CRS In Focus IF11400, Presidential Authority to Address Tariff Barriers in Trade Agreements, by Christopher A. Casey and Brandon J. Murrill. For more on the recent, limited scope agreements, see: CRS Insight IN12152, U.S.-Japan Critical Minerals Agreement, by Kyla H. Kitamura, CRS In Focus IF11120, U.S.-Japan Trade Agreement Negotiations, by Cathleen D. Cimino-Isaacs, and CRS In Focus IF12125, U.S.-China Phase One Trade Deal, by Karen M. Sutter. Congressional Research Service Congressional Research Service
1 1

link to page 11 link to page 12 link to page 6 link to page 11 link to page 12 link to page 6 Major Votes on Free Trade Agreements and Trade Promotion Authority

Multilateral Trade Agreements and the World Trade Organization
In addition to bilateral and regional FTAs, the United States is also party to multilateral trade In addition to bilateral and regional FTAs, the United States is also party to multilateral trade
agreements that outline membership in the WTO, a 164-member international organization. The agreements that outline membership in the WTO, a 164-member international organization. The
WTO was created in 1995 to oversee and administer multilateral trade rules, serve as a forum for WTO was created in 1995 to oversee and administer multilateral trade rules, serve as a forum for
trade liberalization negotiations, and resolve trade disputes.5 When Congress approved the WTO trade liberalization negotiations, and resolve trade disputes.5 When Congress approved the WTO
Uruguay Round Agreements, it included a set of procedures to allow Congress to reconsider U.S. Uruguay Round Agreements, it included a set of procedures to allow Congress to reconsider U.S.
membership in the WTO by passing a joint resolution calling for withdrawal from the membership in the WTO by passing a joint resolution calling for withdrawal from the
organization.6 Congress may vote every five years on withdrawal from the WTO. Resolutions organization.6 Congress may vote every five years on withdrawal from the WTO. Resolutions
were introduced in the House during the 106th and 109th Congress; neither passed. In the 116th were introduced in the House during the 106th and 109th Congress; neither passed. In the 116th
Congress, two resolutions to withdraw from the WTO were introduced (H.J.Res. 89 and S.J.Res. Congress, two resolutions to withdraw from the WTO were introduced (H.J.Res. 89 and S.J.Res.
71); neither were brought up for a vote. Se71); neither were brought up for a vote. See Table 3 for a compilation of major legislation and for a compilation of major legislation and
votes concerning U.S. membership to the WTO. votes concerning U.S. membership to the WTO.
Trade Promotion Authority
Implementing legislation for all U.S. FTAs, except the agreement with Jordan, was considered in Implementing legislation for all U.S. FTAs, except the agreement with Jordan, was considered in
Congress under Trade Promotion Authority (TPA). TPA is the process by which Congress enables Congress under Trade Promotion Authority (TPA). TPA is the process by which Congress enables
FTA legislation to be considered under expedited legislative procedures, provided the President FTA legislation to be considered under expedited legislative procedures, provided the President
observes certain statutory obligations. Because TPA is extended only for limited periods, observes certain statutory obligations. Because TPA is extended only for limited periods,
Congress periodically considers legislation to extend it and to outline future trade negotiation Congress periodically considers legislation to extend it and to outline future trade negotiation
objectives and consultation requirements. Since 1974, Congress has passed seven measures objectives and consultation requirements. Since 1974, Congress has passed seven measures
extending TPA. Most recently, Congress passed TPA legislation in 2015 (via the Bipartisan extending TPA. Most recently, Congress passed TPA legislation in 2015 (via the Bipartisan
Congressional Trade Priorities and Accountability Act of 2015, P.L. 114-26); this authority lapsed Congressional Trade Priorities and Accountability Act of 2015, P.L. 114-26); this authority lapsed
on July 1, 2021. TPA, like many issues related to international trade, has been politically on July 1, 2021. TPA, like many issues related to international trade, has been politically
contentious in Congress over time, resulting in vigorous debate and two previous eight-year contentious in Congress over time, resulting in vigorous debate and two previous eight-year
lapses in authority.7 For a list of major votes on TPA, selapses in authority.7 For a list of major votes on TPA, see Table 4.
Congressional Votes on Select Trade Legislation
Congressional consideration of bills can be a complex process, sometimes requiring multiple Congressional consideration of bills can be a complex process, sometimes requiring multiple
votes. For clarity’s sake, this report only provides the final vote for each measure. More complete votes. For clarity’s sake, this report only provides the final vote for each measure. More complete
bill information can be found on Congress.gov—including roll call votes for all legislation back bill information can be found on Congress.gov—including roll call votes for all legislation back
to 1993. The bill numbers listed in the following tables link to Congress.gov, and the vote tallies to 1993. The bill numbers listed in the following tables link to Congress.gov, and the vote tallies
link to the House and Senate roll call votes, for all votes back to 1993. link to the House and Senate roll call votes, for all votes back to 1993.
Table 1 provides a timeline of FTAs including the date the agreement was signed, the date provides a timeline of FTAs including the date the agreement was signed, the date
implementing legislation was enacted, and the date the agreement went into force. The table also implementing legislation was enacted, and the date the agreement went into force. The table also
notes the TPA legislation under which the trade agreement was considered in Congress. The table notes the TPA legislation under which the trade agreement was considered in Congress. The table
includes comprehensive FTAs that have entered into force and have required congressional includes comprehensive FTAs that have entered into force and have required congressional
approval. This table does not include limited-scope agreements that have not required approval. This table does not include limited-scope agreements that have not required

5 See CRS Report R45417, 5 See CRS Report R45417, World Trade Organization: Overview and Future Direction, coordinated by Cathleen D. , coordinated by Cathleen D.
Cimino-Isaacs. Cimino-Isaacs.
6 Section 125(b) of the Uruguay Round Agreements Act (P.L. 103-465) sets procedures for congressional disapproval 6 Section 125(b) of the Uruguay Round Agreements Act (P.L. 103-465) sets procedures for congressional disapproval
of WTO participation. It specifies that Congress’s approval of the WTO agreement shall cease to be effective “if and of WTO participation. It specifies that Congress’s approval of the WTO agreement shall cease to be effective “if and
only if” Congress enacts a joint resolution calling for withdrawal. Congress may vote every five years on withdrawal. only if” Congress enacts a joint resolution calling for withdrawal. Congress may vote every five years on withdrawal.
7 TPA lapsed for multiple years between 1994 and 2002 and between 2007 and 2015. For more on TPA, see CRS 7 TPA lapsed for multiple years between 1994 and 2002 and between 2007 and 2015. For more on TPA, see CRS
Report R43491, Report R43491, Trade Promotion Authority (TPA): Frequently Asked Questions, by , by ~~Ian F. Fergusson~~Cathleen D. Cimino-Isaacs, Christopher A. Casey, and Christopher and Christopher
M. Davis. M. Davis.
Congressional Research Service Congressional Research Service
2 2

link to page 8 link to page 11 link to page 12 link to page 16 link to page 7 link to page 7 link to page 7 link to page 7 link to page 8 link to page 11 link to page 12 link to page 16 link to page 7 link to page 7 link to page 7 link to page 7 link to page 7 link to page 4 Major Votes on Free Trade Agreements and Trade Promotion Authority

congressional approval, or trade agreements that were signed, but not voted on by Congress, such congressional approval, or trade agreements that were signed, but not voted on by Congress, such
as the Trans-Pacific Partnership.8 as the Trans-Pacific Partnership.8
Table 2 provides major votes on FTAs, including the final House and Senate votes on FTA provides major votes on FTAs, including the final House and Senate votes on FTA
implementing legislation. implementing legislation.
Table 3 provides major legislation and votes on U.S. membership to the WTO, including provides major legislation and votes on U.S. membership to the WTO, including
implementing legislation for multilateral agreements and resolutions calling for the United States implementing legislation for multilateral agreements and resolutions calling for the United States
to withdraw from the WTO. to withdraw from the WTO.
Table 4 provides major votes on TPA legislation. It includes the final House and Senate votes on provides major votes on TPA legislation. It includes the final House and Senate votes on
TPA-related provisions. Votes are grouped by the trade agreement authority granted to the TPA-related provisions. Votes are grouped by the trade agreement authority granted to the
President. President.
For a selected list of CRS products on FTAs and TPA, see t For a selected list of CRS products on FTAs and TPA, see the Appendix.
Table 1. U.S. Free Trade Agreements and Trade Promotion Authority: A Timeline
(1985-2021 descending order by entry into force date) (1985-2021 descending order by entry into force date)
Implementing
U.S. Free
Legislation
Agreement
Trade
Agreement
Signed by
Entered into
Agreement
Signed
President
Force
TPAa
USM USMCAb
11/30/2018 11/30/2018
1/29/2020 1/29/2020
7/1/2020 Bipartisan Congressional Trade 7/1/2020 Bipartisan Congressional Trade
Priorities and Accountability Act Priorities and Accountability Act
of 2015 of 2015
Colombia Colombia
11/22/2006 11/22/2006
10/21/2011 10/21/2011
5/15/2012 Trade Act of 2002 5/15/2012 Trade Act of 2002
South Korea South Korea
6/30/2007 6/30/2007
10/21/2011 10/21/2011
3/15/2012 Trade Act of 2002 3/15/2012 Trade Act of 2002
Panama Panama
6/28/2007 6/28/2007
10/21/2011 10/21/2011
10/31/2012 Trade Act of 2002 10/31/2012 Trade Act of 2002
Peru Peru
4/12/2006 4/12/2006
12/14/2007 12/14/2007
2/1/2009 Trade Act of 2002 2/1/2009 Trade Act of 2002
Oman Oman
1/19/2006 1/19/2006
9/26/2006 9/26/2006
1/1/2009 Trade Act of 2002 1/1/2009 Trade Act of 2002
Bahrain Bahrain
9/14/2004 9/14/2004
1/11/2006 1/11/2006
1/11/2006 Trade Act of 2002 1/11/2006 Trade Act of 2002
CAFTA- CAFTA-DRc
5/28/2004 5/28/2004
8/2/2005 8/2/2005
entered into Trade Act of 2002 entered into Trade Act of 2002
(CAFTA); (CAFTA);
force by country force by country
8/5/2004 (DR) 8/5/2004 (DR)
on a rol ing basis, on a rol ing basis,
2006- 2006-~~200~~9d2009d
Morocco Morocco
6/15/2004 6/15/2004
8/17/2004 8/17/2004
1/1/2006 Trade Act of 2002 1/1/2006 Trade Act of 2002
Australia Australia
5/18/2004 5/18/2004
8/3/2004 8/3/2004
1/1/2005 Trade Act of 2002 1/1/2005 Trade Act of 2002
Chile Chile
6/6/2003 6/6/2003
9/3/2003 9/3/2003
1/1/2004 Trade Act of 2002 1/1/2004 Trade Act of 2002
Singapore Singapore
5/6/2003 5/6/2003
9/3/2003 9/3/2003
1/1/2004 Trade Act of 2002 1/1/2004 Trade Act of 2002

~~8 For more information on recent limited-scope agreements see: CRS Insight IN11208,~~ ~~U.S. Signs Phase One Trade~~
~~Deal with China, by Karen M. Sutter and CRS Report R46140, “Stage One” U.S.-Japan Trade Agreements,~~
~~coordinated by Brock R. Williams. For more on the evolution of U.S. FTA policy, see CRS Report R45198,~~ ~~U.S. and~~
~~Global Trade Agreements: Issues for Congress, by Brock R. Williams.~~ Jordan 10/24/2000 9/28/2001 12/17/2001 Not considered under TPA NAFTAe 12/17/1992 12/8/1993 1/1/1994 Omnibus Trade and Competitiveness Act of 1988 8 For more information on recent limited-scope agreements see footnote 4. The Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) was a The Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) was a
proposed FTA, signed by the United States and 11 other Asia-Pacific countries on Feb. 4, 2016. In Jan. 2017, the proposed FTA, signed by the United States and 11 other Asia-Pacific countries on Feb. 4, 2016. In Jan. 2017, the
United States notified the other TPP signatories that it would not ratify the agreement, effectively ending TPP’s United States notified the other TPP signatories that it would not ratify the agreement, effectively ending TPP’s
potential entry into force as written. The remaining TPP signatories made limited modifications to TPP after the U.S. potential entry into force as written. The remaining TPP signatories made limited modifications to TPP after the U.S.
withdrawal and signed a new agreement, the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership withdrawal and signed a new agreement, the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership
(CPTPP).(CPTPP). ~~The CPTPP entered into force among Australia, Canada, Japan, Mexico, New Zealand, and Singapore in~~
~~2018, for Vietnam in 2019, and for Peru in 2021.~~
Congressional Research Service Congressional Research Service
3 3

link to page 7 link to page 7 link to page 7 link to page 7 ~~link to page 7~~ Major Votes on Free Trade Agreements and Trade Promotion Authority

Implementing
U.S. Free
Legislation
Agreement
Trade
Agreement
Signed by
Entered into
Agreement
Signed
President
Force
TPAa
~~Jordan~~
~~10/24/2000~~
~~9/28/2001~~
~~12/17/2001 Not considered under TPA~~
~~NAFTAe~~
~~12/17/1992~~
~~12/8/1993~~
~~1/1/1994 Omnibus Trade and~~
~~Competitiveness Act of 1988~~
Canad Canadaf
1/2/1988 1/2/1988
9/28/1988 9/28/1988
1/1/1989 Trade and Tariff Act of 1984 1/1/1989 Trade and Tariff Act of 1984
Israel Israel
4/22/1985 4/22/1985
6/11/1985 6/11/1985
8/19/1985 Trade and Tariff Act of 1984 8/19/1985 Trade and Tariff Act of 1984
Source: Compiled fromCompiled from thethe U.S. Trade Representative’s website, Congress.gov, U.S. Trade Representative’s website, Congress.gov, Treaties in Force, , Congressional
Quarterly Almanac, and CRS Report RL33743, Trade Promotion Authority (TPA) and the Role of Congress in , and CRS Report RL33743, Trade Promotion Authority (TPA) and the Role of Congress in
Trade PolicyTrade Policy, by Cathleen D. Cimino-Isaacs and Christopher A. Casey .~~, by Ian F. Fergusson~~
Notes: Also see CRS Infographic IG10001, Also see CRS Infographic IG10001, Trade Promotion Authority (TPA) and U.S. Trade Agreements Timeline, by , by
~~Brock R. Wil iams.~~
Christopher A. Casey and Cathleen D. Cimino-Isaacs. a. Trade Promotion Authority (TPA) is the legislation that grants the President authority to negotiate trade a. Trade Promotion Authority (TPA) is the legislation that grants the President authority to negotiate trade
agreements for which implementing legislation may receive expedited treatment in Congress. agreements for which implementing legislation may receive expedited treatment in Congress.
b. The U.S.-Mexico-Canada Trade Agreement (USMCA) superseded b. The U.S.-Mexico-Canada Trade Agreement (USMCA) superseded ~~the North American Free Trade~~
~~Agreement (NAFTA).~~
NAFTA. c. CAFTA-DR (Dominican Republic-Central America-United States FTA) includes Costa Rica, El Salvador, c. CAFTA-DR (Dominican Republic-Central America-United States FTA) includes Costa Rica, El Salvador,
Guatemala, Honduras, Nicaragua, and the Dominican Republic. Guatemala, Honduras, Nicaragua, and the Dominican Republic.
d. CAFTA-DR entered into force on a rol ing basis as the President certified each country’s compliance with d. CAFTA-DR entered into force on a rol ing basis as the President certified each country’s compliance with
the agreement: El Salvador (March 1, 2006); Honduras and Nicaragua (April 1, 2006); Guatemala (July 1, the agreement: El Salvador (March 1, 2006); Honduras and Nicaragua (April 1, 2006); Guatemala (July 1,
2006); the Dominican Republic (March 1, 2007); and Costa Rica (January 1, 2009). 2006); the Dominican Republic (March 1, 2007); and Costa Rica (January 1, 2009).
e. NAFTA (the North American Free Trade Agreement) included Mexico and Canada, and was superseded by e. NAFTA (the North American Free Trade Agreement) included Mexico and Canada, and was superseded by
USMCA. USMCA.
f. f.
The U.S.-Canada FTA was superseded by NAFTA. The U.S.-Canada FTA was superseded by NAFTA.

Congressional Research Service Congressional Research Service
4 4

link to page 6 link to page 10 link to page 10 link to page 6 link to page 10 link to page 10
Table 2. Major Votes on Free Trade Agreement (FTA) Implementing Legislation
(Agreements listed by date FTA went into force (se (Agreements listed by date FTA went into force (see Table 1.)) )
Final Votes
Congress
(Year)
U.S. FTA
Bill
Description of Bill
House
Senate
116th (2020) 116th (2020)
USMCAa
H.R. 5430 H.R. 5430
FTA implementation act; enacted, P.L. 116-113. FTA implementation act; enacted, P.L. 116-113.
385-41 (Passed) 385-41 (Passed)
89-10 (Passed) 01/16/2020 89-10 (Passed) 01/16/2020
12/19/2019 12/19/2019
112th (2011) 112th (2011)
Colombia
H.R. 3078 H.R. 3078
FTA implementation act; enacted, P.L. 112-42. FTA implementation act; enacted, P.L. 112-42.
262-167 (Passed) 262-167 (Passed)
66-33 (Passed) 66-33 (Passed)
10/12/2011 10/12/2011
10/12/2011 10/12/2011
110th (2008) 110th (2008)
H.Res. 1092 H.Res. 1092
Resolution to suspend TPA consideration of Colombia FTA Resolution to suspend TPA consideration of Colombia FTA
224-195 (Passed) 224-195 (Passed)
n/a n/a
in the 110th Congress. (The Administration did not resubmit in the 110th Congress. (The Administration did not resubmit
04/10/2008 04/10/2008
the Colombia FTA to Congress until the 112th Congress.) the Colombia FTA to Congress until the 112th Congress.)
112th (2011) 112th (2011)
South
H.R. 3080 H.R. 3080
FTA implementation act; enacted, P.L. 112-41. FTA implementation act; enacted, P.L. 112-41.
278-151 (Passed) 278-151 (Passed)
83-15 (Passed) 83-15 (Passed)
Korea
10/12/2011 10/12/2011
10/12/2011 10/12/2011
112th (2011) 112th (2011)
Panama
H.R. 3079 H.R. 3079
FTA implementation act; enacted, P.L. 112-43. FTA implementation act; enacted, P.L. 112-43.
300-129 (Passed) 300-129 (Passed)
77-22 (Passed) 77-22 (Passed)
10/12/2011 10/12/2011
10/12/2011 10/12/2011
110th (2007) 110th (2007)
Peru
H.R. 3688 H.R. 3688
FTA implementation act; enacted, P.L. 110-138. FTA implementation act; enacted, P.L. 110-138.
285-132 (Passed) 285-132 (Passed)
77-18 (Passed) 77-18 (Passed)
11/08/2007 11/08/2007
12/04/2007 12/04/2007
109th (2006) 109th (2006)
Oman
H.R. 5684 H.R. 5684
FTA implementation act; enacted, P.L. 109-283. FTA implementation act; enacted, P.L. 109-283.
221-205 (Passed) 221-205 (Passed)
62-32 (Passed) 62-32 (Passed)
07/20/2006 07/20/2006
09/19/2006 09/19/2006
109th (2006) 109th (2006)

S. 3569 S. 3569
FTA implementation act. FTA implementation act.
— —
60-34 (Passed) 60-34 (Passed)
06/29/2006 06/29/2006
109th (2006) 109th (2006)
Bahrain
H.R. 4340 H.R. 4340
FTA implementation act; enacted, P.L. 109-169. FTA implementation act; enacted, P.L. 109-169.
327-95 (Passed) 327-95 (Passed)
By Unanimous Consent. By Unanimous Consent.
12/07/2005 12/07/2005
12/13/2005 12/13/2005
109th (2005) 109th (2005)
CAFTA-
H.R. 3045 H.R. 3045
FTA implementation act; enacted, P.L. 109-53. FTA implementation act; enacted, P.L. 109-53.
217-215 (Passed) 217-215 (Passed)
55-45 (Passed) 55-45 (Passed)
DRb
07/28/2005 07/28/2005
07/28/2005 07/28/2005
109th (2005) 109th (2005)

S. 1307 S. 1307
FTA implementation act. FTA implementation act.
— —
54-45 (Passed) 54-45 (Passed)
06/30/2005 06/30/2005
CRS-5 CRS-5

link to page 10 link to page 10 link to page 10 link to page 10
Final Votes
Congress
(Year)
U.S. FTA
Bill
Description of Bill
House
Senate
108th (2004) 108th (2004)
Morocco
H.R. 4842 H.R. 4842
FTA implementation act; enacted, P.L. 108-302. FTA implementation act; enacted, P.L. 108-302.
323-99 (Passed) 323-99 (Passed)
By Unanimous Consent By Unanimous Consent
07/22/2004 07/22/2004
07/22/2004 07/22/2004
108th (2004) 108th (2004)

S. 2677 S. 2677
FTA implementation act. FTA implementation act.
— —
85-13 (Passed) 85-13 (Passed)
07/21/2004 07/21/2004
108th (2004) 108th (2004)
Australia
H.R. 4759 H.R. 4759
FTA implementation act; enacted, P.L. 108-286. FTA implementation act; enacted, P.L. 108-286.
314-109 (Passed) 314-109 (Passed)
80-16 (Passed) 80-16 (Passed)
07/14/2004 07/14/2004
07/15/2004 07/15/2004
108th (2004) 108th (2004)
Chile
H.R. 2738 H.R. 2738
FTA implementation act; enacted, P.L. 108-77. FTA implementation act; enacted, P.L. 108-77.
270-156 (Passed) 270-156 (Passed)
65-32 (Passed) 65-32 (Passed)
07/24/2003 07/24/2003
07/31/2003 07/31/2003
108th (2003) 108th (2003)

S.Res. 211 S.Res. 211
A resolution expressing the sense of the Senate regarding A resolution expressing the sense of the Senate regarding
n/a n/a
By Unanimous Consent By Unanimous Consent
provisions in the Chile and Singapore FTAs and immigration. provisions in the Chile and Singapore FTAs and immigration.
07/31/2003 07/31/2003
108th (2003) 108th (2003)
Singapore
H.R. 2739 H.R. 2739
FTA implementation act; enacted, P.L. 108-78. FTA implementation act; enacted, P.L. 108-78.
272-155 (Passed) 272-155 (Passed)
66-32 (Passed) 66-32 (Passed)
07/24/2003 07/24/2003
07/31/2003 07/31/2003
108th (2003) 108th (2003)

S.Res. 211 S.Res. 211
A resolution expressing the sense of the Senate regarding A resolution expressing the sense of the Senate regarding
n/a n/a
By Unanimous Consent By Unanimous Consent
provisions in the Chile and Singapore FTAs on trade provisions in the Chile and Singapore FTAs on trade
07/31/2003 07/31/2003
agreements and immigration. agreements and immigration.
107th (2001) 107th (2001)
Jordan
H.R. 2603 H.R. 2603
FTA implementation act; enacted, P.L. 107-43. FTA implementation act; enacted, P.L. 107-43.
Voice vote (Agreed) Voice vote (Agreed)
Voice vote (Agreed) Voice vote (Agreed)
07/31/2001 07/31/2001
09/24/2001 09/24/2001
103rd (1993) 103rd (1993)
NAFTAc
H.R. 3450 H.R. 3450
FTA implementation act; enacted, P.L. 103-182. FTA implementation act; enacted, P.L. 103-182.
234-200 (Passed) 234-200 (Passed)
61-38 (Passed) 61-38 (Passed)
11/17/1993 11/17/1993
11/20/1993 11/20/1993
100th (1988) 100th (1988)
Canadad
H.R. 5090 H.R. 5090
FTA implementation act; enacted, P.L. 100-449. FTA implementation act; enacted, P.L. 100-449.
366-40 (Passed) 366-40 (Passed)
83-9 (Passed) 83-9 (Passed)
08/09/1988 08/09/1988
09/19/1988 09/19/1988
104th (1996) 104th (1996)
Israel
H.R. 3074 H.R. 3074
Amendments to the Israel FTA, enacted, P.L. 104-234. Amendments to the Israel FTA, enacted, P.L. 104-234.
Voice vote (Agreed) Voice vote (Agreed)
By Unanimous Consent By Unanimous Consent
04/16/1996 04/16/1996
09/27/1996 09/27/1996
CRS-6 CRS-6

Final Votes
Congress
(Year)
U.S. FTA
Bill
Description of Bill
House
Senate
99th (1985) 99th (1985)

H.R. 2268 H.R. 2268
FTA implementation act; enacted, P.L. 99-47. FTA implementation act; enacted, P.L. 99-47.
422-0 (Passed) 05/07/1985 422-0 (Passed) 05/07/1985
Voice Vote (Agreed) Voice Vote (Agreed)
05/23/1985 05/23/1985
Source: Compiled from Congress.gov and CQ Almanac. Compiled from Congress.gov and CQ Almanac.
Notes: TPA=Trade Promotion Authority. For more detailed bil information, the bil numbers above link to Congress.gov, and the vote tallies link to the House and TPA=Trade Promotion Authority. For more detailed bil information, the bil numbers above link to Congress.gov, and the vote tallies link to the House and
Senate rol call votes, where available. In a few examples (Oman, CAFTA-DR, Morocco), the Senate passed an implementing bil before the House version. The Senate Senate rol call votes, where available. In a few examples (Oman, CAFTA-DR, Morocco), the Senate passed an implementing bil before the House version. The Senate
later considered and passed the House version of the bil , as revenue-generating bil s must originate in the Houselater considered and passed the House version of the bil , as revenue-generating bil s must originate in the House. The Senate bil s that received a vote are included in The Senate bil s that received a vote are included in
the above table. the above table.
a. USMCA, the U.S.-Mexico-Canada Trade Agreement, superseded NAFTA. a. USMCA, the U.S.-Mexico-Canada Trade Agreement, superseded NAFTA.
b. CAFTA-DR is the Dominican Republic-Central America-United States FTA, and includes Costa Rica, El Salvador, Guatemala, Honduras, Nicaragua, and the b. CAFTA-DR is the Dominican Republic-Central America-United States FTA, and includes Costa Rica, El Salvador, Guatemala, Honduras, Nicaragua, and the
Dominican Republic. Dominican Republic.
c. NAFTA, the North American Free Trade Agreement, included Mexico and Canada and was superseded by USMCA. c. NAFTA, the North American Free Trade Agreement, included Mexico and Canada and was superseded by USMCA.
d. U.S.-Canada FTA was effectively superseded by NAFTA. d. U.S.-Canada FTA was effectively superseded by NAFTA.
CRS-7 CRS-7

Table 3. U.S. Membership to the World Trade Organization (WTO): Major Legislation and Votes
103rd-117th Congress (1994-2021) 103rd-117th Congress (1994-2021)
Final Votes
Congress
P.L./Bill
Type
Description of Bill
House
Senate
103rd 103rd
P.L. 103-465 P.L. 103-465
Implementation act Implementation act
Uruguay Round Agreements Act (Implementation Uruguay Round Agreements Act (Implementation
288-146 (Passed) 288-146 (Passed)
76-24 (Passed) 76-24 (Passed)
(H.R. 5110) (H.R. 5110)
act for WTO agreements). act for WTO agreements).
11/29/1994 11/29/1994
12/01/1994 12/01/1994
116th 116th
S.J.Res. 71 S.J.Res. 71
Proposed Withdrawal from Proposed Withdrawal from
Withdrawing the approval of the United States from Withdrawing the approval of the United States from
— —
[no votes taken] [no votes taken]
WTO WTO
the Agreement establishing the WTO. the Agreement establishing the WTO.
116th 116th
H.J.Res. 89 H.J.Res. 89
Proposed Withdrawal from Proposed Withdrawal from
Withdrawing the approval of the United States from Withdrawing the approval of the United States from
[no votes taken] [no votes taken]
— —
WTO WTO
the Agreement establishing the WTO. the Agreement establishing the WTO.
109th 109th
H.J.Res. 27 H.J.Res. 27
Proposed Withdrawal from Proposed Withdrawal from
Withdrawing the approval of the United States from Withdrawing the approval of the United States from
86-338 (Failed) 86-338 (Failed)
— —
WTO WTO
the Agreement establishing the WTO. the Agreement establishing the WTO.
06/09/2005 06/09/2005
109th 109th
H.Res. 304 H.Res. 304
Consideration of Proposed Consideration of Proposed
Providing for consideration of the joint resolution Providing for consideration of the joint resolution
Voice vote (Passed) Voice vote (Passed)
n/a n/a
Withdrawal from WTO Withdrawal from WTO
(H.J.Res. 27) withdrawing the approval of the United (H.J.Res. 27) withdrawing the approval of the United
06/08/2005 06/08/2005
States from the Agreement establishing the WTO. States from the Agreement establishing the WTO.
106th 106th
H.J.Res. 90 H.J.Res. 90
Proposed Withdrawal from Proposed Withdrawal from
Withdrawing the approval of the United States from Withdrawing the approval of the United States from
56-363 (Failed) 56-363 (Failed)
— —
WTO WTO
the Agreement establishing the WTO. the Agreement establishing the WTO.
06/21/2000 06/21/2000
106th 106th
H.Res. 528 H.Res. 528
Consideration of Proposed Consideration of Proposed
Providing for consideration of the joint resolution Providing for consideration of the joint resolution
343-61(Passed) 343-61(Passed)
n/a n/a
Withdrawal from WTO Withdrawal from WTO
(H.J.Res. 90) withdrawing the approval of the United (H.J.Res. 90) withdrawing the approval of the United
06/21/2000 06/21/2000
States from the Agreement establishing the WTO. States from the Agreement establishing the WTO.
106th 106th
H.J.Res. 89 H.J.Res. 89
Proposed Withdrawal from Proposed Withdrawal from
Withdrawing the approval of the United States from Withdrawing the approval of the United States from
[no votes taken] [no votes taken]
— —
WTO WTO
the Agreement establishing the WTO. the Agreement establishing the WTO.
Source: Compiled from Congress.gov. Compiled from Congress.gov.
Notes: The Uruguay Round of the World Trade Organization (WTO) included a series of multilateral agreements that established the WTO and outlined trade rules The Uruguay Round of the World Trade Organization (WTO) included a series of multilateral agreements that established the WTO and outlined trade rules
and membership to the international organization. The President signed the Uruguay Round Agreements on April 15, 1994. Congress considered implementation and membership to the international organization. The President signed the Uruguay Round Agreements on April 15, 1994. Congress considered implementation
legislation for the agreements under the TPA provisions in the Omnibus Trade and Competitiveness Act of 1988. The implementation act was signed into law on legislation for the agreements under the TPA provisions in the Omnibus Trade and Competitiveness Act of 1988. The implementation act was signed into law on
December 8, 1994, and the Uruguay Round Agreements went into force on January 1, 1995. December 8, 1994, and the Uruguay Round Agreements went into force on January 1, 1995.
Section 125(b) of the Uruguay Round Agreements Act (P.L. 103-465) sets procedures for congressional disapproval of WTO participation. It specifies that Congress’s Section 125(b) of the Uruguay Round Agreements Act (P.L. 103-465) sets procedures for congressional disapproval of WTO participation. It specifies that Congress’s
approval of the WTO agreements shall cease to be effective “if and only if” Congress enacts a joint resolution calling for withdrawal. Congress may vote every five years approval of the WTO agreements shall cease to be effective “if and only if” Congress enacts a joint resolution calling for withdrawal. Congress may vote every five years
on withdrawal. on withdrawal.
CRS-8 CRS-8

link to page 15 link to page 15 link to page 6 link to page 15 link to page 15 link to page 6
Table 4. Major Votes on Trade Promotion Authority (TPA) Provisions
(Final votes on TPA provisions (1974-2021), legislation listed by date of vote) (Final votes on TPA provisions (1974-2021), legislation listed by date of vote)
Final Votes on TPA provisions
Notes
Name of Act or
Congress
Bill
Description
House Vote
Senate Vote

Votes related to the 2015 TPA grant

114th 114th
H.R. 2146 H.R. 2146
Bipartisan
218-208, (Passed) 6/18/2015 218-208, (Passed) 6/18/2015
60-38, (Passed) 6/24/2015 60-38, (Passed) 6/24/2015
Enacted, P.L. 114-26, 06/29/2015. Extends Enacted, P.L. 114-26, 06/29/2015. Extends

Congressional Trade
TPA to include the Trans-Pacific TPA to include the Trans-Pacific
Priorities and
Partnership negotiations, USMCA, and Partnership negotiations, USMCA, and
Accountability Act of
other prospective FTAs. TPA provisions other prospective FTAs. TPA provisions
2015
expired July 1, 2021. expired July 1, 2021.
114th 114th
H.R. 1314 H.R. 1314
Bipartisan Budget Act of Bipartisan Budget Act of
Measure considered under Measure considered under
Vote concerning TPA: 62-37, The TPA provisions in H.R. 1314 passed in Vote concerning TPA: 62-37, The TPA provisions in H.R. 1314 passed in
2015 2015
“division of the question.” “division of the question.”
(Passed) 5/22/201 (Passed) 5/22/2015b
the Senate, but failed in the House. An the Senate, but failed in the House. An
Measure failed because while Measure failed because while
amendment identical to the Senate version amendment identical to the Senate version
Title 1 (TPA) passed, Title II Title 1 (TPA) passed, Title II
of H.R. 1314 was then inserted into an of H.R. 1314 was then inserted into an
failed. failed.
unrelated bil , H.R. 2146 (see above). unrelated bil , H.R. 2146 (see above).
Title 1 vote (on TPA): Title 1 vote (on TPA):
219-211, 6/12/2015; 219-211, 6/12/2015;
Title II vote (on other issues): Title II vote (on other issues):
126-302, 6/12/201126-302, 6/12/2015a
Votes related to the 2002 TPA grant

110th 110th
H.Res. 1092 H.Res. 1092
Resolution to remove TPA Resolution to remove TPA
224-195, (Agreed) 224-195, (Agreed)
n/a n/a
This measure removed TPA consideration This measure removed TPA consideration
consideration from the consideration from the
04/10/2008 04/10/2008
(granted through the TPA provisions in (granted through the TPA provisions in
U.S.-Colombia FTA bil U.S.-Colombia FTA bil
the Trade Act of 2002) from the U.S.- the Trade Act of 2002) from the U.S.-
(H.R. 5724) in the 110th (H.R. 5724) in the 110th
Colombia FTA (H.R. 5724) in the 110th Colombia FTA (H.R. 5724) in the 110th
Congress Congress
Congress. No further legislative action Congress. No further legislative action
occurred in the 110th Congress on H.R. occurred in the 110th Congress on H.R.
5724. The U.S.-Colombia FTA was not 5724. The U.S.-Colombia FTA was not
resubmitted to Congress until the 112th resubmitted to Congress until the 112th
Congress. Congress.
107th 107th
H.R. 3009 H.R. 3009
The Trade Act of 2002
215-212, (Passed) 7/27/2002 215-212, (Passed) 7/27/2002
64-34, (Passed) 64-34, (Passed)
Enacted, P.L. 107-210, 8/6/2002. Eleven Enacted, P.L. 107-210, 8/6/2002. Eleven
8/1/2002 8/1/2002
FTAs were negotiated and considered in FTAs were negotiated and considered in
Congress under the TPA provisions in the Congress under the TPA provisions in the
Trade Act of 2002.Trade Act of 2002. See Table 1.
CRS-9 CRS-9

Final Votes on TPA provisions
Notes
Name of Act or
Congress
Bill
Description
House Vote
Senate Vote

107th 107th
H.Res. 450 H.Res. 450
H. Res. 450 Relating to H. Res. 450 Relating to
216-215, (Agreed) 6/26/2002 216-215, (Agreed) 6/26/2002
n/a n/a
A rule to expand the scope of H.R. 3009 A rule to expand the scope of H.R. 3009
consideration of H.R. 3009 consideration of H.R. 3009
(the Trade Act of 2002) (the Trade Act of 2002)
107th 107th
H.R. 3005 H.R. 3005
Bipartisan Trade Promotion Bipartisan Trade Promotion
215-214, (Passed) 12/6/2001 215-214, (Passed) 12/6/2001
n/a n/a

Authority Act of 2002 Authority Act of 2002
TPA Lapse, 1994-2002

105th 105th
H.R. 2621 H.R. 2621
Reciprocal Trade Reciprocal Trade
180-243, (Failed) 9/25/1998 180-243, (Failed) 9/25/1998
n/a n/a
Measure attempted to renew TPA. Measure attempted to renew TPA.
Agreement Authorities Act Agreement Authorities Act
Measure failed. TPA lapsed between 1994 Measure failed. TPA lapsed between 1994
of 1997 of 1997
and 2002. and 2002.
Votes related to the 1988 TPA grant

103rd 103rd
H.R. 1876 H.R. 1876
To extend fast-track
295-126, (Passed) 6/22/1993 295-126, (Passed) 6/22/1993
76-16, (Passed) 6/30/1993 76-16, (Passed) 6/30/1993
Enacted, P.L. 103-49, 7/2/1993. Amended Enacted, P.L. 103-49, 7/2/1993. Amended
procedures for Uruguay
the Omnibus Trade and Competitiveness the Omnibus Trade and Competitiveness
Round trade
Act of 1988 (see below) to extend TPA Act of 1988 (see below) to extend TPA
agreements
for the WTO Uruguay Round agreements. for the WTO Uruguay Round agreements.
102nd 102nd
S.Res. 78 S.Res. 78
Resolution disapproving a Resolution disapproving a
n/a n/a
36-59, (Failed) 5/24/1991 36-59, (Failed) 5/24/1991
A failed attempt to deny a two-year A failed attempt to deny a two-year
two-year extension of fast- two-year extension of fast-
extension of the TPA provisions in the extension of the TPA provisions in the
track procedures under the track procedures under the
Omnibus Trade and Competitiveness Act Omnibus Trade and Competitiveness Act
Omnibus Trade and Omnibus Trade and
of 1988. Also see identical bil H.Res. 101. of 1988. Also see identical bil H.Res. 101.
Competitiveness Act of Competitiveness Act of
1988. 1988.
102nd 102nd
H.Res. 101 H.Res. 101
Resolution disapproving the Resolution disapproving the
192-231, (Failed) 5/23/1991 192-231, (Failed) 5/23/1991
n/a n/a
Also see identical bil S. Res. 78 (above). Also see identical bil S. Res. 78 (above).
extension of fast-track extension of fast-track
procedures to implement procedures to implement
trade agreements entered trade agreements entered
into after May 31, 1991, and into after May 31, 1991, and
by May 31, 1993. by May 31, 1993.
102nd 102nd
H.Res. 146 H.Res. 146
Resolution concerning U.S. Resolution concerning U.S.
329-85, (Passed) 5/23/1991 329-85, (Passed) 5/23/1991
n/a n/a
Bil attempted to emphasize that Congress Bil attempted to emphasize that Congress
objectives of future trade objectives of future trade
could suspend fast track consideration if could suspend fast track consideration if
agreements agreements
the Administration did not negotiate the Administration did not negotiate
adequate protections for workers, adequate protections for workers,
industries, and the environment. industries, and the environment.
CRS-10 CRS-10

Final Votes on TPA provisions
Notes
Name of Act or
Congress
Bill
Description
House Vote
Senate Vote

100th 100th
H.R. 4848 H.R. 4848
Omnibus Trade and
376-45, (Passed) 7/13/1988 376-45, (Passed) 7/13/1988
85-11, (Passed) 8/3/1988 85-11, (Passed) 8/3/1988
Enacted, P.L. 100-418, 8/23/1988. Provided Enacted, P.L. 100-418, 8/23/1988. Provided
Competitiveness Act of
TPA consideration for NAFTA and the TPA consideration for NAFTA and the
1988
WTO Uruguay Round Agreements. WTO Uruguay Round Agreements.
100th 100th
H.R. 3 H.R. 3
Omnibus Trade and Omnibus Trade and
312-107, (Passed) 312-107, (Passed)
63-36, (Passed) 4/27/1988; 63-36, (Passed) 4/27/1988;
Measure failed over presidential veto. Measure failed over presidential veto.
Competitiveness Act of Competitiveness Act of
04/21/1987; 04/21/1987;
(Vetoed by the President, (Vetoed by the President,
Provisions from H.R.3, concerning TPA, Provisions from H.R.3, concerning TPA,
1987 1987
(Vetoed by the President, (Vetoed by the President,
5/24/1988) 5/24/1988)
were reintroduced into H.R. 4848, which were reintroduced into H.R. 4848, which
5/24/1988); 5/24/1988);
was enacted as P.L. 100-418 (see above). was enacted as P.L. 100-418 (see above).
Motion to override veto: 61- Motion to override veto: 61-
Motion to override Motion to override
37, (Failed) 6/8/1988 37, (Failed) 6/8/1988
Presidential veto: 308-113, Presidential veto: 308-113,
(Passed) 5/24/1988 (Passed) 5/24/1988
100th 100th
S. 1420 S. 1420
Omnibus Trade and Omnibus Trade and
n/a n/a
Senate passed H.R. 3 in lieu Senate passed H.R. 3 in lieu
See related bil H.R. 3, above. See related bil H.R. 3, above.
Competitiveness Act of Competitiveness Act of
of this measure, by Yea-Nay of this measure, by Yea-Nay
1987 1987
Vote of 71-27, 07/21/1987 Vote of 71-27, 07/21/1987
Votes related to the 1984 TPA grant

98th 98th
H.R. 3398 H.R. 3398
The Trade and Tariff
386–1, (Passed) 10/9/1984 386–1, (Passed) 10/9/1984
96-0, (Passed) 9/20/1984 96-0, (Passed) 9/20/1984
Enacted, P.L. 98-573, 10/30/1984. Provided Enacted, P.L. 98-573, 10/30/1984. Provided
Act of 1984
TPA consideration to the Canada and TPA consideration to the Canada and
Israel FTAs. Israel FTAs.
98th 98th
H.R. 5377 H.R. 5377
U.S. Israel Free Trade Area U.S. Israel Free Trade Area
416-6, (Passed) 10/3/1984 416-6, (Passed) 10/3/1984
n/a n/a
Text of bil was inserted into H.R.3398, Text of bil was inserted into H.R.3398,
the Trade and Tariff Act of 1984 (see the Trade and Tariff Act of 1984 (see
above). Outlined authority and negotiating above). Outlined authority and negotiating
priorities for the U.S.-Israel FTA. priorities for the U.S.-Israel FTA.
Votes related to the 1974 TPA grant

96th 96th
H.R. 4537 H.R. 4537
Trade Agreements Act
395-7, (Passed) 07/11/1979 395-7, (Passed) 07/11/1979
90-4, (Passed) 07/23/1979 90-4, (Passed) 07/23/1979
Enacted, P.L. 96-39, 07/26/1979. Enacted, P.L. 96-39, 07/26/1979.
of 1979
CRS-11 CRS-11

Final Votes on TPA provisions
Notes
Name of Act or
Congress
Bill
Description
House Vote
Senate Vote

Votes related to the 1974 TPA grant

93rd 93rd
H.R. 10710 H.R. 10710
Trade Act of 1974
323-36, (Passed) 12/20/1974 323-36, (Passed) 12/20/1974
72-4, (Passed) 12/20/1974 72-4, (Passed) 12/20/1974
Enacted, P.L. 93-618, 01/03/1975. Enacted, P.L. 93-618, 01/03/1975.
Source: Compiled by CRS from Congress.gov. Compiled by CRS from Congress.gov.
Notes: Bolded titles were enacted into law. For more detailed bil information, the bil numbers above link to Congress.gov. In addition to the current lapse in TPA, Bolded titles were enacted into law. For more detailed bil information, the bil numbers above link to Congress.gov. In addition to the current lapse in TPA,
there were two notable lapses: between 1994 and 2002 and between 2007 and 2015. For more on TPA, see CRS Report R43491, there were two notable lapses: between 1994 and 2002 and between 2007 and 2015. For more on TPA, see CRS Report R43491, Trade Promotion Authority (TPA):
Frequently Asked Questions, by , by ~~Ian F. Fergusson~~Cathleen D. Cimino-Isaacs, Christopher A. Casey, and Christopher M. Davis. and Christopher M. Davis.
a. The measure was voted on in the House under a procedure known as “division of the question,” which requires separate votes on each component, but approval of a. The measure was voted on in the House under a procedure known as “division of the question,” which requires separate votes on each component, but approval of
both to pass. Title 1 concerning TPA passed the House; however, Title II, concerning trade adjustment assistance, failed. Thus, the measure failed, under “division of both to pass. Title 1 concerning TPA passed the House; however, Title II, concerning trade adjustment assistance, failed. Thus, the measure failed, under “division of
the question.” (House rol call votes on H.R. 1314: Title I (TPA): Rol no. 362, 6/12/2015; Title II: Rol no. 361, 6/12/2015.) the question.” (House rol call votes on H.R. 1314: Title I (TPA): Rol no. 362, 6/12/2015; Title II: Rol no. 361, 6/12/2015.)
b. Rol call vote 193, 5/22/2015. b. Rol call vote 193, 5/22/2015.

CRS-12 CRS-12

Major Votes on Free Trade Agreements and Trade Promotion Authority

Appendix. Selected CRS Reports and Resources
Trade Promotion Authority
CRS Report R43491, CRS Report R43491, Trade Promotion Authority (TPA): Frequently Asked Questions, by , by ~~Ian F.~~
~~Fergusson~~Cathleen D. Cimino-Isaacs, Christopher A. Casey, and Christopher M. Davis and Christopher M. Davis
CRS Report RL33743, CRS Report RL33743, Trade Promotion Authority (TPA) and the Role of Congress in Trade
Policy, by , by ~~Ian F. Fergusson~~Cathleen D. Cimino-Isaacs and Christopher A. Casey CRS In Focus IF10038, Trade Promotion Authority (TPA), by Christopher A. Casey and Cathleen D. Cimino-Isaacs
CRS Infographic IG10001, CRS Infographic IG10001, Trade Promotion Authority (TPA) and U.S. Trade Agreements
Timeline, by , by ~~Brock R. Williams~~Christopher A. Casey and Cathleen D. Cimino-Isaacs
CRS In Focus IF11400, CRS In Focus IF11400, Presidential Authority to Address Tariff Barriers in Trade Agreements, by , by
Christopher A. Casey and Brandon J. Murrill Christopher A. Casey and Brandon J. Murrill
Free Trade Agreements: Selected Issues
CRS Report CRS Report ~~R46669,~~ ~~International Trade and Finance: Overview and Key Issues for the 117th~~
~~Congress, by Andres B. Schwarzenberg and Christopher A. Casey~~R45148, U.S. Trade Policy Primer: Frequently Asked Questions, coordinated by Cathleen D. Cimino-Isaacs (See section “U.S. Trade (See section “U.S. Trade
Agreements and Negotiations.”) Agreements and Negotiations.”)
CRS Report CRS Report ~~R45198, U.S. and Global Trade Agreements: Issues for Congress, by Brock R.~~
~~Williams~~
~~CRS In Focus IF10161, International Trade Agreements and Job Estimates, by James K. Jackson~~
~~CRS Report~~ R44044, R44044, U.S. Trade with Free Trade Agreement (FTA) Partners, by , by ~~James K.~~
~~Jackson~~Andres B. Schwarzenberg
CRS In Focus IF10046, CRS In Focus IF10046, Worker Rights Provisions in Free Trade Agreements (FTAs), by Cathleen , by Cathleen
D. Cimino-Isaacs and M. Angeles VillarrealD. Cimino-Isaacs and M. Angeles Villarreal
CRS In Focus IF10972, CRS In Focus IF10972, Labor Enforcement Issues in U.S. FTAs, by Cathleen D. Cimino-Isaacs, by Cathleen D. Cimino-Isaacs
CRS In Focus IF10166, CRS In Focus IF10166, Environmental Provisions in Free Trade Agreements (FTAs), by Richard , by Richard
K. Lattanzio and K. Lattanzio and ~~Ian F. Fergusson~~Christopher A. Casey
CRS In Focus IF10033, CRS In Focus IF10033, Intellectual Property Rights (IPR) and International Trade, by Shayerah , by Shayerah
I. Akhtar and I. Akhtar and ~~Ian F. Fergusson~~Liana Wong
Free Trade Agreements
CRS Report R44981, CRS Report R44981, The United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement (USMCA), by M. Angeles , by M. Angeles
VillarrealVillarreal ~~and Ian F. Fergusson~~
CRS In Focus IF10997, CRS In Focus IF10997, U.S.-Mexico-Canada (USMCA) Trade Agreement, by M. Angeles , by M. Angeles
VillarrealVillarreal ~~and Ian F. Fergusson~~
~~CRS Legal Sidebar LSB10399, USMCA: Implementation and Considerations for Congress, by~~
~~Nina M. Hart~~ CRS In Focus IF10047, North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), by M. Angeles Villarreal
CRS In Focus IF10733, CRS In Focus IF10733, U.S.-South Korea (KORUS) FTA~~, coordinated by Brock R. Williams~~ and Bilateral Trade Relations, by Liana Wong and Mark E. Manyin
CRS Report RL34470, CRS Report RL34470, The U.S.-Colombia Free Trade Agreement: Background and Issues, by M. , by M.
Angeles VillarrealAngeles Villarreal ~~and Edward Y. Gracia~~
CRS Report RS22164, CRS Report RS22164, DR-CAFTA: Regional Issues, by Clare Ribando Seelke, by Clare Ribando Seelke
Congressional Research Service Congressional Research Service

13 13

Major Votes on Free Trade Agreements and Trade Promotion Authority

CRS In Focus IF10394, CRS In Focus IF10394, Dominican Republic-Central America-United States Free Trade
Agreement (CAFTA-DR), by M. Angeles Villarreal , by M. Angeles Villarreal
~~CRS Insight IN10903, CRS Products on the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), by~~
~~M. Angeles Villarreal~~
Multilateral Trade Agreements
CRS Report R45417, CRS Report R45417, World Trade Organization: Overview and Future Direction, coordinated by , coordinated by
Cathleen D. Cimino-Isaacs Cathleen D. Cimino-Isaacs
Select Limited Scope Agreements
CRS Insight IN12152, U.S.-Japan Critical Minerals Agreement, by Kyla H. Kitamura CRS In Focus IF11120, U.S.-Japan Trade Agreement Negotiations, by Cathleen D. Cimino-Isaacs CRS In Focus IF12125, U.S.-China Phase One Trade Deal~~CRS Report R46140, “Stage One” U.S.-Japan Trade Agreements, coordinated by Brock R.~~
~~Williams~~
CRS Insight IN11208, U.S. Signs Phase One Trade Deal with China, by Karen M. Sutter , by Karen M. Sutter

Author Information

Keigh E. Hammond Keigh E. Hammond

Senior Research Librarian Senior Research Librarian

~~Congressional Research Service~~

14

~~Major Votes on Free Trade Agreements and Trade Promotion Authority~~

Disclaimer
This document was prepared by the Congressional Research Service (CRS). CRS serves as nonpartisan This document was prepared by the Congressional Research Service (CRS). CRS serves as nonpartisan
shared staff to congressional committees and Members of Congress. It operates solely at the behest of and shared staff to congressional committees and Members of Congress. It operates solely at the behest of and
under the direction of Congress. Information in a CRS Report should not be relied upon for purposes other under the direction of Congress. Information in a CRS Report should not be relied upon for purposes other
than public understanding of information that has been provided by CRS to Members of Congress in than public understanding of information that has been provided by CRS to Members of Congress in
connection with CRS’s institutional role. CRS Reports, as a work of the United States Government, are not connection with CRS’s institutional role. CRS Reports, as a work of the United States Government, are not
subject to copyright protection in the United States. Any CRS Report may be reproduced and distributed in subject to copyright protection in the United States. Any CRS Report may be reproduced and distributed in
its entirety without permission from CRS. However, as a CRS Report may include copyrighted images or its entirety without permission from CRS. However, as a CRS Report may include copyrighted images or
material from a third party, you may need to obtain the permission of the copyright holder if you wish to material from a third party, you may need to obtain the permission of the copyright holder if you wish to
copy or otherwise use copyrighted material. copy or otherwise use copyrighted material.

Congressional Research Service Congressional Research Service
R45846 R45846 · VERSION 810 · UPDATED
1514