DOCSLIB.ORG

Farewell to Jackson-Vanik: the Case for Unconditional MFN Status for the People's Republic of China

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Farewell to Jackson-Vanik: the Case for Unconditional MFN Status for the People's Republic of China Farewell to Jackson-Vanik: The Case for Unconditional MFN Status for the People's Republic of China L. Jay Kuot The Jackson-Vanik Amendment to the 1974 Trade Act linked Most- Favored-Nation("MFN") statusfor "nonmarket economy" countries to the issue of human rights. In recent years, Jackson-Vanik's mandate has spurred contentious debate over the extension of MFN status to the People's Republic of China because of continued reports of human rights abuses in that country. In this Comment, the author argues that U.S. policymakers have failed to ask the threshold question of whether a coun- try's human rights record is a proper criterionfor extending MFN treat- ment. The author advocates the repeal of Jackson-Vanik and the extension of unconditional MFN status as a basis for normalized trade relations between the United States and China. I. INTRODUCTION The Jackson-Vanik Amendment' to the 1974 Trade Act2 established guidelines for U.S. trade relations with Communist nations. The Amendment linked the extension of Most-Favored-Nation (MFN) status for a "nonmarket economy" country to its record on human rights, specifically its emigration practices.' Since its adoption, Jackson-Vanik has mandated an annual review for most Communist nations receiving U.S. MFN status. In recent years, Jackson-Vanik has become a focal point of tension in relations between the United States and China.4 In the aftermath of the t A.B. 1990, Political Science, Stanford University; J.D. 1994, Boalt Hall School of Law, University of California, Berkeley. Copyright © 1994 by Asian Law Journal I would like to thank Professor Bob Berring for his guidance on this piece, and the editors at Asian Law Journal,Eric Lai, Grace Hsu, Lyra Rufino-Maceda, and Jasmin Patel, for their patience, insight, and hard work. Thanks also to the able staff of AL and to its Executive Board members, who have worked so hard to make this journal possible. This Comment is dedicated to my parents, Jenkal and Mary Tan Lee Kuo, whose love for China has been my inspiration. 1. 19 U.S.C. § 2432 (1988). 2. Pub. L. No. 93-618, 88 Stat. 1978 (1975) (codified as amended in scattered sections of 19 U.S.C.). 3. Id. 4. See, e.g., Most-Favored-NationStatus for the People'sRepublic of China: Heat ings Before the Subcomms. on Human Rights and Int'l Orgs., Asian and Pacific Affairs, and on Int'l Economic Policy and Trade of the House Comm. on ForeignAffairs, 101st Cong., 2d Sess. 1 (1990) [hereinafter May 1990 MFN Hearings] (statement of Rep. Stephen Solarz) ("Whether the United States maintains ASIAN LAW JOURVAL [Vol. 1:85 Tiananmen Square incident in June of 1989,1 many human rights advocates criticized the Bush Administration's response as too accommodating and began to call for tougher U.S. measures, including revocation of MFN treat- mentO From 1990 to 1992, China's MFN status hung in a balance between White House efforts to continue MFN treatment and congressional attempts to revoke or place conditions on its extension.8 In May of 1993, with con- gressional approval, President Clinton renewed China's MFN status but attached strict conditions requiring improvements in China's human rights record before he would agree to renew China's MFN status in 1994.9 China's MFN status is one of the most important foreign policy decisions our Government will make this year and certainly the most important with respect to China."); Sino-American Relations: Current Policy Issues, HearingsBefore the Subcomm. on East Asian and PacificAffairs of the Senate Comm. on Foreign Relations, 102d Cong., 1st Sees. 1 (1991) [hereinafter Sino-American Relations Hearings] (statement of Sen. Alan Cranston) (citing M-N status for China as "It]he principal issue before the Congress today" in U.S.-China relations). 5. On June 4, 1989, the Chinese military opened fire upon demonstrators in and around Tiananmen Square in Beijing. For a detailed account of the Tiananmen Square massacre, see Nicholas D. Kristof, TroopsAttack and CrushBeijing Protest; Thousands Fight Back, Scores Are Killed, N.Y. Taws, June 4, 1989, at Al; Daniel Southerland, Troops Roll Through Bejing To Crush Protesters; Hundreds Feared Killed as Chinese Fight Back, WASH. PosT, June 4, 1989, at Al. 6. Although President Bush quickly condemned China's leaders and pledged to halt military sales and suspend visits by military delegations, he was reluctant to impose additional inunediate sanctions. See Robert Pear, PresidentAssails Shootings in China, N.Y. TZWs, June 4, 1989, at A21; Bernard Weinraub, PresidentSpurns OtherSanctions, N.Y. TuvES, June 6,1989, at Al. For a detailed overview of economic sanctions and other measures imposed by the Bush Administration in the wake of the 1989 crackdown, see REPORT ON EcoNoMIc SANCrIoNs AOAINST CHINA: MFSSAE FROM TIm PPEsmmrr oF m UNITED STATEs, H.R. Doc. No. 192, 101st Cong., 2d Seas. 9-19 (1990) (discussing suspension of Overseas Private Investment Corporation services, Trade and Development Program activities, munitions export licensing, crime control and detection instruments equipment shipments, satellite technology transfer, nuclear cooperation, and efforts to liberalize controls of high technology exports). 7. See, e.g., Hobart Rowen, Dollars Before Principle, WASH. POST, May 24, 1990, ait A23; Charles D. Gray, China: Most FavoredPrison, WASH. PosT, July 15, 1990, at B5. 8. In 1990, President Bush notified Congress that he intended to extend China's MN status for one year. See Determination No. 21, 3 C.F.R. 345 (1990 comp.). Congressional Democrats moved quickly to pass a resolution disapproving the extension in light of the Tiananmen massacre a year earlier. See H.R.J. Res. 647, 101st Cong., 2d Seas. (1990). Although Congress never presented the 1990 bill to the President, by 1991 opponents of the President's policy mustered enough votes to pass a bill placing serious restrictions on the renewal of Chinese MFN status. See H.R. 2212, 102d Cong., 2d Seas. (1991). The bill conditioned subsequent renewals upon a clear showing of improvements in the Chinese government's record on human rights, weapons proliferation, and outstanding trade issues. When President Bush vetoed the bill, the House voted to override, see 138 CoNG. REc. Hl 157 (daily ed. Mar. 11, 1992), but the Senate fell 6 votes short of the two-thirds majority needed to override the President's veto. See 138 CoNG. Rac. S3857 (daily ed. Mar. 18, 1992). In 1992, after President Bush once again announced his intent to renew Chinese M'N status, see Determination No. 29,3 C.F.R. 362 (1992 comp.), Congress passed yet another resolution of disapproval. See H.R. 5318, 102d Cong., 2d Sess. (1992). Again, the Senate failed to override the President's veto of this bill. See 138 CONo. Rec. S15957 (daily ed. Oct. 1, 1992). 9. See CONTINUATION OF WAIvER AuTHORY: COMMNauNxIoATON FROM ma PRESImENT OF THE UMrED STArEs, H.R. Do=. No. 97, 103d Cong., IstSeas. 1,4-5 (1993) [hereinafter CoNTINUATION O' WArER Aurmon-rv] (conditioning subsequent renewal of MFN in 1994 to China's abiding by freedom of emigration objectives and an agreement on prison labor, and on progress toward adherence to the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the release of political prisoners, the respect for 'ibet's religious and cultural heritage, and the permitting of international broadcasts into China). 1994] FAREWELL TO JACKSON-yANIK The Chinese have watched this high-stakes, political seesaw with keen interest and, more recently, vocal protest."0 Given the importance of the MfN issue to bilateral relations, final resolution of the MFN question has become critical to any coherent U.S. policy toward China. The American public's collective outrage over the events in 1989 would seem to require decisive action on the part of the U.S. government. The litany of abuses in China, confirmed by personal accounts11 and by international monitoring organizations such as Asia Watch12 and Amnesty International,13 form strong ammunition for those who would restrict or completely revoke MFN status. Recent proposals to restrict MYFN extension14 have condemned China for the nationwide arrest of political dissidents and participants in the 1989 uprising,15 the abuse and torture of detained persons, 6 China's de facto martial law in 10. See Sheryl WuDunn, China Denounces Terms of Clinton's Trade Deal, N.Y. TMs, May 30, 1993, at A4 (quoting the Chinese government response that "[i]f the U.S. side should insist on its way, it can only seriously impair Sino-U.S. relations and their economic and trade cooperation, which eventually will hurt the vital interests of the United States. Any attempt to impose one's way on others will go nowhere:). 11. See, e.g., Chris Yeung, Torture of Liu Denied by BeUing, S. CENA MoRNING PoST,August 13, 1993, at 7, available in LEXIS, World Library, SChina File (describing smuggled letters from imprisoned dissident student leader Liu Gang stating that he had been tortured by prison staff). 12. See, e.g., ChinaMost-Favored-Nation Status: HearingsBefore the Senate Comm. on Finance, 102d Cong., 1st Sess. 81-86 (1991) [hereinafter June 1991 MFN Hearings] (statement of Holly Burkhalter, Washington Representative, Human Rights Watch). 13. See, e.g., Chris Yeung, Amnesty Hits at Torture Reforms, S. CHmNA MoRNING PosT, April 16, 1993, at 11, available in LEXIS, World Library, SChina File (describing Amnesty International's criticism of China's alleged reforms aimed at curbing widespread torture). 14. See, e.g., H.R. 2212 and H.R. 5318, supra note 8. 15. After the 1989 crackdown, thousands of participants-perhaps as many as 30,000-were allegedly rounded up and detained without charge. See May 1990 MFN Hearings,supra note 4,at 47.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • 153682NCJRS.Pdf
    If you have issues viewing or accessing this file contact us at NCJRS.gov. .. .; J , ..~. .;"~ • .' ~ .~ _... '> .' UJ.l.IU.ll Calendar No. 605 102n CONGRESS REPORT HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 2d Session 102-1070 • ANNUAL REPORT FOR THE YEAR 1991 REPORT OF THE • SELECT COMMITTEE ON NARCOTICS ABUSE AND CONTROL ONE HUNDRED SECOND CONGRESS FIRST SESSION SCNAC-102-1-14 N'CJRS ACQUISITKON,; Printed for the use of the Select Committee on Narcotics Abuse and Control U.s. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE • o WASHINGTON : 1992 :au • SELECI' COMMITTEE ON NARCOTICS ABUSE AND CONTROL (102D CoNGRESS) CHARLES B. RANGEL, New York, Chairman JACK BROOKS, Texas LAWRENCE COUGHLIN, Pennsylvania FORTNEY H. (PETE) STARK, California BENJAMIN A. GILMAN, New York JAMES H. SCHEUER, New York MICHAEL G. OXLEY, Ohio CARDISS COLLINS, TIlinois F. JAMES SENSENBRENNER, JR., FRANK J. GUARINI, New Jersey Wisconsin DANTE B. FASCELL, Florida ROBERT K. DORNAN, California WILLIAM J. HUGHES, New Jersey TOM LEWIS, Florida • MEL LEVINE, California JAMES M. INHOFE, Oklahoma SOWMON P. ORTIZ, Texas WALLY HERGER, California LAWRENCE J. SMITH, Florida CHRISTOPHER SHAYS, Connecticut EDOLPHUS "ED" TOWNS, New York BILL PAXON, New York JAMES A. TRAFICANT, JR., Ohio WILLIAM F. CLINGER, JR., Pennsylvania KWEISI MFUME, Maryland HOWARD COBLE, North Carolina NITA M. WWEY, New York PAUL E. GILLMOR, Ohio DONALD M. PAYNE, New Jersey JIM RAMSTAD, Minnesota ROMANO L. MAZZOLI, Kentucky RON DE LUGO, Virgin Islands GEORGE J. HOCHBRUECKNER, New York CRAIG A. WASHINGTON, Texas ROBERT E. ANDREWS, New Jersey COMMI'ITEE STAFF EDWARD H. JURlTH, Staff Director P&'rER J. CoNIGLIO, Minority Staff Director (Ill 153682 U.S. Department of Justice National Institute of Justice .
    [Show full text]
  • Extensions of Remarks Hon.Henryj.Nowak
    March 24, 1982 EXTENSIONS OF REMARKS 5419 EXTENSIONS OF REMARKS PORT USER-FEE PLANS REQUIRE harbor would be 1.7 cents, Duluth-Su­ Kudrna, chairman of the commission, MORE STUDY perior's 1.4 cents, Toledo's 3.2 cents, testified: and New York-New Jersey 2.7 cents. We do not believe that the impacts of the That type of disparity raises serious proposed deepdraft fees have been studied HON.HENRYJ.NOWAK questions about the potential impact in sufficient detail. Without better impact OF NEW YORK on traffic diversion from port to port information it seems to the GLC that we IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES or to other modes of transport. Even are sailing into a storm without a navigation system. Wednesday, March 24, 1982 'more basic is the question of the po­ tential adverse impact any port user e Mr. NOWAK. Mr. Speaker, among Following are 13 areas the GLC sug­ fee would have on ports like Buffalo's, gested for detailed analysis: the administration's proposals for re­ which deal heavily in bulk cargo for ducing Federal expenditures is a plan the hard-pressed auto, steel, and grain THE 13 AREAs SUGGESTED BY GLC to establish a system of user fees that would shift the financial responsibility milling industries. 1. DOUBLE CHARGES FOR DOMUTIC FREIGHT for harbor maintenance and improve­ The seriousness of those questions Application of charges directly by each ments from the Federal Government are compounded when one considers port may cause domestic freight to incur a to the deepwater ports. that the administation is also propos­ double charge-one at the origin and one at ing a separate user-fee plan to recoup the destination ports.
    [Show full text]
  • Trade and the Separation of Powers Timothy Meyer
    Vanderbilt University Law School Scholarship@Vanderbilt Law Vanderbilt Law School Faculty Publications Faculty Scholarship 2019 Trade and the Separation of Powers Timothy Meyer Ganesh Sitaraman Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarship.law.vanderbilt.edu/faculty-publications Part of the International Law Commons, and the International Trade Law Commons Recommended Citation Timothy Meyer and Ganesh Sitaraman, Trade and the Separation of Powers, 107 California Law Review. 583 (2019) Available at: https://scholarship.law.vanderbilt.edu/faculty-publications/1093 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Faculty Scholarship at Scholarship@Vanderbilt Law. It has been accepted for inclusion in Vanderbilt Law School Faculty Publications by an authorized administrator of Scholarship@Vanderbilt Law. For more information, please contact [email protected]. +(,121/,1( Citation: Timothy Meyer; Ganesh Sitaraman, Trade and the Separation of Powers, 107 Calif. L. Rev. 583 (2019) Provided by: Vanderbilt University Law School Content downloaded/printed from HeinOnline Wed Jun 5 12:21:18 2019 -- Your use of this HeinOnline PDF indicates your acceptance of HeinOnline's Terms and Conditions of the license agreement available at https://heinonline.org/HOL/License -- The search text of this PDF is generated from uncorrected OCR text. -- To obtain permission to use this article beyond the scope of your HeinOnline license, please use: Copyright Information Use QR Code reader to send PDF to your smartphone or tablet device Trade and the Separation of Powers Timothy Meyer* & Ganesh Sitaraman** There are two paradigms through which to view trade law and policy within the American constitutionalsystem.
    [Show full text]
  • Political Questions in International Trade: Judicial Review of Section 301?
    Michigan Journal of International Law Volume 10 Issue 3 1989 Political Questions in International Trade: Judicial Review of Section 301? Erwin P. Eichmann Gary N. Horlick Follow this and additional works at: https://repository.law.umich.edu/mjil Part of the Courts Commons, International Trade Law Commons, Legislation Commons, and the President/Executive Department Commons Recommended Citation Erwin P. Eichmann & Gary N. Horlick, Political Questions in International Trade: Judicial Review of Section 301?, 10 MICH. J. INT'L L. 735 (1989). Available at: https://repository.law.umich.edu/mjil/vol10/iss3/1 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Michigan Journal of International Law at University of Michigan Law School Scholarship Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in Michigan Journal of International Law by an authorized editor of University of Michigan Law School Scholarship Repository. For more information, please contact [email protected]. POLITICAL QUESTIONS IN INTERNATIONAL TRADE: JUDICIAL REVIEW OF SECTION 301? Erwin P. Eichmann and Gary N. Horlick Section 301 of the Trade Act of 1974 ("Section 301")' has become an increasingly potent and widely-used tool in the U.S. arsenal of trade policy measures. The past few years have seen a proliferation of Sec- tion 301 cases, affecting the trade of goods and services in Europe, Asia, and Latin America. Even so, in the debate over the Omnibus Trade and Competitiveness Act of 1988 ("Omnibus Trade Act"), Con- gress expressed impatience with the President's discretion in not un- dertaking more Section 301 retaliations. 2 But while much attention has focused on the politics and policy aspects of Section 301, little has been discussed of the legal issues underpinning it.
    [Show full text]
  • Page 429 TITLE 19—CUSTOMS DUTIES Ments Relating to the Return As the Secretary Shall Prescribe
    Page 429 TITLE 19—CUSTOMS DUTIES ments relating to the return as the Secretary Sec. shall prescribe; or 2114e. Negotiation of agreements concerning high (2) if not returned to the country of origin, technology industries. be disposed of in the manner prescribed by law 2115. Bilateral trade agreements. 2116. Agreements with developing countries. for articles forfeited for violation of the cus- 2117. International safeguard procedures. toms laws. 2118. Access to supplies. (Pub. L. 92–587, title II, § 203, Oct. 27, 1972, 86 2119. Staging requirements and rounding author- Stat. 1297.) ity. § 2094. Rules and regulations PART 2—OTHER AUTHORITY The Secretary shall prescribe such rules and 2131. Authorization of appropriation for GATT re- vision. regulations as are necessary and appropriate to 2132. Balance-of-payments authority. carry out the provisions of this chapter. 2133. Compensation authority. (Pub. L. 92–587, title II, § 204, Oct. 27, 1972, 86 2134. Two-year residual authority to negotiate du- Stat. 1297.) ties. 2135. Termination and withdrawal authority. § 2095. Definitions 2136. Reciprocal nondiscriminatory treatment. 2137. Reservation of articles for national security For the purposes of this chapter— or other reasons. (1) The term ‘‘Secretary’’ means the Sec- 2138. Omitted. retary of the Treasury. (2) The term ‘‘United States’’ includes the PART 3—HEARINGS AND ADVICE CONCERNING several States, the District of Columbia, and NEGOTIATIONS the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico. 2151. Advice from International Trade Commission. (3) The term ‘‘pre-Columbian monumental or 2152. Advice from executive departments and other architectural sculpture or mural’’ means— sources. (A) any stone carving or wall art which— 2153. Public hearings.
    [Show full text]
  • International Trade and Finance: Overview and Issues for the 116Th Congress
    International Trade and Finance: Overview and Issues for the 116th Congress January 28, 2019 Congressional Research Service https://crsreports.congress.gov R45474 SUMMARY R45474 International Trade and Finance: Overview and January 28, 2019 Issues for the 116th Congress The U.S. Constitution grants authority to Congress to lay and collect duties and regulate foreign Rebecca M. Nelson, commerce. Congress exercises this authority in numerous ways, including through oversight of Coordinator Specialist in International trade policy and consideration of legislation to implement trade agreements and authorize trade Trade and Finance programs. Policy issues cover areas such as U.S. trade negotiations, U.S. trade and economic relations with specific regions and countries, international institutions focused on trade, tariff and nontariff barriers, worker dislocation due to trade liberalization, enforcement of trade laws and Andres B. Schwarzenberg, trade agreement commitments, import and export policies, international investment, economic Coordinator sanctions, and other trade-related functions of the federal government. Congress also has Analyst in International authority over U.S. financial commitments to international financial institutions and oversight Trade and Finance responsibilities for trade- and finance-related agencies of the U.S. government. Issues in the 116th Congress During his first two years in office, President Trump has focused on reevaluating many U.S. international trade and economic policies and relationships. The President’s focus on these issues could continue over the next two years. Broad policy debates during the 116th Congress may include the impact of trade and trade agreements on the U.S. economy, including U.S. jobs; the causes and consequences of the U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • Consequences of US Trade Policy on EU-US Trade Relations and the Global Trading System
    STUDY Requested by the INTA committee Consequences of US trade policy on EU-US trade relations and the global trading system Policy Department for External Relations Directorate General for External Policies of the Union PE 603.882 - November 2018 EN DIRECTORATE-GENERAL FOR EXTERNAL POLICIES POLICY DEPARTMENT STUDY Consequences of US trade policy on EU-US trade relations and the global trading system ABSTRACT The Trump Administration’s trade policy is driven by the belief that previous Administrations have let other countries take advantage of the United States for foreign policy reasons, as demonstrated by America’s more open trade regime and its trade deficits. It is determined to end this perceived imbalance by demanding reciprocity instead, and is willing to use tough tactics to achieve this through strict enforcement of its procurement and trade defense law; expansive tax provisions; bringing the WTO dispute settlement to a halt; withdrawing from and forcing others to renegotiate existing bilateral and multilateral agreements; adopting a novel “national security” argument to justify breaking WTO tariff commitments for steel, aluminum and possibly autos; and enacting punitive tariffs on billions of dollars of imports from China, possibly threatening a trade war. The scenarios for U.S.-EU trade relations as well as the global trading system are anything but rosy. The EU can stand up to the Administration’s “bullying,” or it can take advantage of America’s need for a “re- balancing” to build its own stature by taking simple steps to improve EU-U.S. trade, forging a way forward in the WTO, and providing necessary leadership to address the dangers China’s economic system poses to the global trading order.
    [Show full text]
  • Read the Full Report
    The Smoot-Hawley Fixation: Putting the Sino-US Trade War in Contemporary and Historical Perspective Simon J. Evenett1 University of St. Gallen, the St. Gallen Endowment for Prosperity Through Trade2 and CEPR 29 September 2019 This paper was published in the Journal of International Economic Law on 6 December 2019. Unfortunately, the published version excluded many of the pertinent footnotes that lawyers love and that, more importantly, support key elements of the argument. For this reason we make the full version of the paper available here. 1 Professor of International Trade and Economic Development, Department of Economics, University of St. Gallen, Switzerland, and Coordinator, the Global Trade Alert, the independent commercial policy monitor. I thank Patrick Buess, Johannes Fritz, Maxime Kantenwein, and Piotr Lukaszuk for help preparing the empirical evidence for this paper. I thank Anne van Aaken, Chad Bown, Andrew Lang, two referees, and Piotr Lukaszuk for comments on an earlier draft of this paper. I also thank Doug Irwin, Kevin O’Rourke, and Niko Wolf for checking my characterisation of the economic history literature on trade policy developments in the 1930s. All remaining errors are mine. Comments are welcome and should be sent to [email protected]. 2 Founder of the new non-profit Foundation to house the Global Trade Alert and other commercial policy- related initiatives. Abstract The extent to which the Sino-US trade war represents a break from the past is examined. This ongoing trade war is benchmarked empirically against the Smoot-Hawley tariff increase and against the sustained, covert discrimination by governments against foreign commercial interests witnessed since the start of the global economic crisis.
    [Show full text]
  • Current Situation in Namibia
    Current Situation in Namibia http://www.aluka.org/action/showMetadata?doi=10.5555/AL.SFF.DOCUMENT.uscg013 Use of the Aluka digital library is subject to Aluka’s Terms and Conditions, available at http://www.aluka.org/page/about/termsConditions.jsp. By using Aluka, you agree that you have read and will abide by the Terms and Conditions. Among other things, the Terms and Conditions provide that the content in the Aluka digital library is only for personal, non-commercial use by authorized users of Aluka in connection with research, scholarship, and education. The content in the Aluka digital library is subject to copyright, with the exception of certain governmental works and very old materials that may be in the public domain under applicable law. Permission must be sought from Aluka and/or the applicable copyright holder in connection with any duplication or distribution of these materials where required by applicable law. Aluka is a not-for-profit initiative dedicated to creating and preserving a digital archive of materials about and from the developing world. For more information about Aluka, please see http://www.aluka.org Current Situation in Namibia Alternative title Current Situation in Namibia Author/Creator Subcommittee on Africa; Committee on Foreign Affairs; House of Representatives Publisher U.S. Government Printing Office Date 1979-05-07 Resource type Hearings Language English Subject Coverage (spatial) Namibia, United States Source Congressional Hearings and Mission Reports: U.S. Relations with Southern Africa Description Witness is Donald F. McHenry, Deputy U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations. Hearing is chaired by Stephen J.
    [Show full text]
  • Chapter 2 Globalization: Past, Present and Future Chapter 1 Analyzed The
    Chapter 2 Globalization: Past, Present and Future Chapter 1 analyzed the structure of the global economy that has been revealed by the novel coronavirus disease (COVID-19) crisis from the viewpoints of the movement of people, goods, funds, and ideas (technological know-how and data) while taking into consideration the restrictions imposed on face-to-face communication due to the COVID-19 pandemic. COVID-19 transmission through human-to-human interactions has largely spread due to the progress of globalization. However, until now, the world has achieved development thanks to globalization and the movement of people, goods and ideas (technological know-how and data). This chapter explains the conceptual framework of “unbundling” that was proposed by Baldwin (2016) to change the way of thinking about globalization, and discusses the past, present and future of globalization. In addition, the role of government, which has been changing amid globalization, is under the spotlight once again, raising expectations that government will play a role adapted to the ongoing globalization. Moreover, in the situation where the changing globalization and a network of economic partnership agreements (EPAs) showed combined effects, Japan has been transforming itself from a trading nation to an investment-oriented nation in recent years due to the development of supply chain networks, mainly in Asia, and an increase in outward foreign direct investment. On the other hand, the importance of dealing with the challenge of global sustainability has become clear. Looking toward the future of globalization, it is expected that the coming era will require more investments in digitalization and human resources.
    [Show full text]
  • Trade Facilitation and Trade Enforcement Act of 2015
    PUBLIC LAW 114–125—FEB. 24, 2016 TRADE FACILITATION AND TRADE ENFORCEMENT ACT OF 2015 VerDate Sep 11 2014 15:35 Jun 21, 2016 Jkt 059139 PO 00125 Frm 00001 Fmt 6579 Sfmt 6579 E:\PUBLAW\PUBL125.114 PUBL125 dkrause on DSKHT7XVN1PROD with PUBLAWS 130 STAT. 122 PUBLIC LAW 114–125—FEB. 24, 2016 Public Law 114–125 114th Congress An Act Feb. 24, 2016 To reauthorize trade facilitation and trade enforcement functions and activities, [H.R. 644] and for other purposes. Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of Trade the United States of America in Congress assembled, Facilitation and Trade SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE; TABLE OF CONTENTS. Enforcement HORT ITLE Act of 2015. (a) S T .—This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Trade Facilita- 19 USC 4301 tion and Trade Enforcement Act of 2015’’. note. (b) TABLE OF CONTENTS.—The table of contents for this Act is follows: Sec. 1. Short title; table of contents. Sec. 2. Definitions. TITLE I—TRADE FACILITATION AND TRADE ENFORCEMENT Sec. 101. Improving partnership programs. Sec. 102. Report on effectiveness of trade enforcement activities. Sec. 103. Priorities and performance standards for customs modernization, trade fa- cilitation, and trade enforcement functions and programs. Sec. 104. Educational seminars to improve efforts to classify and appraise imported articles, to improve trade enforcement efforts, and to otherwise facilitate legitimate international trade. Sec. 105. Joint strategic plan. Sec. 106. Automated Commercial Environment. Sec. 107. International Trade Data System. Sec. 108. Consultations with respect to mutual recognition arrangements. Sec. 109. Commercial Customs Operations Advisory Committee.
    [Show full text]
  • Accounts Committee, 70. 186 Adams. Abigail, 56 Adams, Frank, 196
    Index Accounts Committee, 70. 186 Appropriations. Committee on (House) Adams. Abigail, 56 appointment to the, 321 Adams, Frank, 196 chairman also on Rules, 2 I I,2 13 Adams, Henry, 4 I, 174 chairman on Democratic steering Adams, John, 41,47, 248 committee, 277, 359 Chairmen Stevens, Garfield, and Adams, John Quincy, 90, 95, 106, 110- Randall, 170, 185, 190, 210 111 created, 144, 167. 168, 169, 172. 177, Advertisements, fS3, I95 184, 220 Agriculture. See also Sugar. duties on estimates government expenditures, 170 Jeffersonians identified with, 3 1, 86 exclusive assignment to the, 2 16, 32 1 prices, 229. 232, 261, 266, 303 importance of the, 358 tariffs favoring, 232, 261 within the Joint Budget Committee, 274 Agriculture Department, 303 loses some jurisdiction, 2 10 Aid to Families with Dependent Children members on Budget, 353 (AFDC). 344-345 members on Joint Study Committee on Aldrich, Nelson W., 228, 232. 241, 245, Budget Control, 352 247 privileged in reporting bills, 185 Allen, Leo. 3 I3 staff of the. 322-323 Allison, William B., 24 I Appropriations, Committee on (Senate), 274, 352 Altmeyer, Arthur J., 291-292 American Medical Association (AMA), Archer, William, 378, 381 Army, Ci.S. Spe also War Department 310, 343, 345 appropriation bills amended, 136-137, American Newspaper Publishers 137, 139-140 Association, 256 appropriation increases, 127, 253 American Party, 134 Civil War appropriations, 160, 167 American Political Science Association, Continental Army supplies, I7 273 individual appropriation bills for the. American System, 108 102 Ames, Fisher, 35. 45 mobilization of the Union Army, 174 Anderson, H. W., 303 Arthur, Chester A,, 175, 206, 208 Assay omces, 105, 166 Andrew, John, 235 Astor, John Jacob, 120 Andrews, Mary.
    [Show full text]