Environment in Fast Track Trade Authority: Summary of the Clinton Administration Proposal

Environment in Fast Track Trade Authority: Summary of the Clinton Administration Proposal

97-879 ENR
October 1, 1997
CRS Report for Congress
Received through the CRS Web
Environment in Fast Track Trade Authority:
Summary of the Clinton Administration Proposal
Susan R. Fletcher
Senior Analyst in International Environmental Policy
Environment and Natural Resources Policy Division
Summary
President Clinton has asked Congress for "fast track" authority for implementing
future trade agreements; this authority would limit congressional debate and prevent
amendments to implementing legislation. Delays in completing this proposal were
attributed to difficulties in reconciling conflicting pressures over environment and labor
concerns. The President's proposal contains references to environmental concerns, but
various interests are likely to seek clarification on these points.
On October 1, 1997, the Senate Finance Committee marked up and approved its
version of fast-track legislation. For a discussion of this and other trade legislation, see
CRS Issue Brief 97016, Trade Agreements: Renewing the Negotiating and Fast Track
Implementing Authority.1
On September 16, 1997, President Clinton submitted to Congress the proposed
Export Expansion and Reciprocal Trade Agreements Act of 1997, legislation to renew the
"fast track" authority for implementing future trade agreements. Fast track procedures
provide for limited debate and no amendments to implementing legislation. There are
expectations that the United States will soon begin negotiating expansion of free trade
with Chile and other countries in the Western Hemisphere.
Delays in completing this proposal had been attributed to the difficulties
Administration officials had in reconciling the conflicting pressures for and against
1 The Senate Finance Committee bill includes mention of environmental matters under three
of the principal trade negotiating objectives: trade in services, foreign investment, and regulatory
competition. In addition, the bill includes international economic policy objectives to reinforce
the trade negotiations process. On environment, the bill states that, "it is the policy of the United
States to reinforce the trade agreements process by ... expanding the production of goods and
trade in goods and services to ensure the optimal use of the world's resources, while seeking to
protect and preserve the environment and to enhance the international means for doing so."
Congressional Research Service ˜ The Library of Congress

CRS-2
including environment and labor concerns in the fast track bill. The proposal sent to
Congress attempts to win support from both sides by adopting somewhat of a compromise
on environment and labor. While if adopted, these provisions would be the first direct
references to environment in overall negotiating authority in a fast track law, they are also
somewhat conditional and may require additional clarification of their intent and effect.
The specific references to environment or environment-related issues in the proposal are
as follows:
"Trade Negotiating Objectives" (Section 2) include three direct references to
environment:
--
Section 2 (a), Overall Trade Negotiating Objectives, includes subsection (5):
"to address those aspects of foreign government policies and practices
regarding labor, the environment, and other matters that are directly related to
trade and decrease market opportunities for United States exports or distort
U.S. trade."
This language seems intended to reassure those who express concern that general
environmental objectives will intrude into and complicate trade negotiations and
agreements, even when they are not directly related to trade. It also appears to be directed
toward those concerned that legitimate environmental concerns will be left out of such
negotiations. However, the term "directly related to trade" would appear to most
participants and observers in trade matters to require additional negotiation among
Members of Congress to get clarity on what would and would not be included in this
terminology if this proposal is introduced. It is expected that considerable debate will
occur over how to clarify this language.
--
Section 2 (b), Principal Trade Negotiating Objectives, includes subsection (7),
"Worker Rights and Environmental Protection," which states "The principal
negotiating objectives of the United States regarding worker rights and
protection of the environment are, through the World Trade Organization,
....(D) to promote sustainable development; and (E) to seek to ensure that trade
and environmental protection are mutually supportive, including through
further clarification of the relationship between them."
Environmental groups have expressed concern that this language appears to relegate
these objectives to the WTO, and perhaps by inference, to exclude them from upcoming
regional and bilateral agreements. This is not regarded by these groups as an acceptable
approach, because they feel that the WTO has achieved little on environmental issues to
date.
--
Section 2(c), Guidance for Negotiators, states in subsection (1) "In pursuing the
negotiating objectives described in subsection (b), the United States negotiators
shall take into account United States domestic objectives including, but not
limited to, the protection of health or safety, essential security, environmental,
consumer or employment opportunity interests and the law and regulations
related thereto."
This language relates to the objective of protecting U.S. environmental laws and
levels of protection during trade negotiations and parallels language on services and

CRS-3
foreign investment included in the Omnibus Trade and Competitiveness Act of 1988 (P.L.
100-418, Title 1), the last major authority for fast-track procedures.
There are a number of other sections of potential interest in relation to environmental
issues, including adding more obligations with regard to consultation with Congress;
section 7(b), which, among other things, continues currently allowed public input on any
matters relevant to a proposed trade agreement; and section 2(b)(5) on transparency,
which includes increased public access to information on trade issues and increasing the
openness of international dispute settlement procedures.
In materials prepared to accompany the fast track proposal to Congress, the
Administration identified three major objectives: "(1) to break down unfair foreign trade
barriers and create good American jobs; (2) to promote and advance worker rights; and
(3) to promote responsible environmental protections. Throughout this process on fast
track, our goal has been to ensure the President has the capacity to pursue all three
objectives effectively." In addition, they note a commitment to conclude companion
labor/environment agreements in future trade agreements where appropriate, and they
note that Chile has already agreed to enter into such agreements.
Discussions in Congress are underway on legislation to accept parts or all of the
Administration's proposed language or combine it with other approaches. On October 1,
1997, the Senate Finance Committee marked up and approved its own version of fast-
track legislation. Several other legislative proposals have been introduced in Congress
over the past year, some explicitly prohibiting setting or amending environmental stan-
dards in legislation implementing trade agreements under fast track authority. (For
additional information on this subject, see CRS Report 97-876 E, Fast-Track Authority:
Debate Over the President's Proposal, and CRS Report 97-886 E, Fast-Track Trade
Authority: Which Environmental Issues are "Directly Related to Trade"?)