[Senate Hearing 115-386]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
S. Hrg. 115-386
NOMINATIONS OF JEFFREY GERRISH,
GREGORY DOUD, AND JASON KEARNS
=======================================================================
HEARING
before the
COMMITTEE ON FINANCE
UNITED STATES SENATE
ONE HUNDRED FIFTEENTH CONGRESS
FIRST SESSION
on the
NOMINATIONS OF
JEFFREY GERRISH, TO BE DEPUTY UNITED STATES TRADE REPRESENTATIVE FOR
ASIA, EUROPE, THE MIDDLE EAST, AND INDUSTRIAL COMPETITIVENESS; GREGORY
DOUD, TO BE CHIEF AGRICULTURAL NEGOTIATOR, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES
TRADE REPRESENTATIVE; AND JASON KEARNS, TO BE A MEMBER OF THE UNITED
STATES INTERNATIONAL TRADE COMMISSION
__________
OCTOBER 5, 2017
__________
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Printed for the use of the Committee on Finance
______
U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE
32-958-PDF WASHINGTON : 2018
COMMITTEE ON FINANCE
ORRIN G. HATCH, Utah, Chairman
CHUCK GRASSLEY, Iowa RON WYDEN, Oregon
MIKE CRAPO, Idaho DEBBIE STABENOW, Michigan
PAT ROBERTS, Kansas MARIA CANTWELL, Washington
MICHAEL B. ENZI, Wyoming BILL NELSON, Florida
JOHN CORNYN, Texas ROBERT MENENDEZ, New Jersey
JOHN THUNE, South Dakota THOMAS R. CARPER, Delaware
RICHARD BURR, North Carolina BENJAMIN L. CARDIN, Maryland
JOHNNY ISAKSON, Georgia SHERROD BROWN, Ohio
ROB PORTMAN, Ohio MICHAEL F. BENNET, Colorado
PATRICK J. TOOMEY, Pennsylvania ROBERT P. CASEY, Jr., Pennsylvania
DEAN HELLER, Nevada MARK R. WARNER, Virginia
TIM SCOTT, South Carolina CLAIRE McCASKILL, Missouri
BILL CASSIDY, Louisiana
A. Jay Khosla, Staff Director
Joshua Sheinkman, Democratic Staff Director
(ii)
C O N T E N T S
----------
OPENING STATEMENTS
Page
Hatch, Hon. Orrin G., a U.S. Senator from Utah, chairman,
Committee on Finance........................................... 1
Wyden, Hon. Ron, a U.S. Senator from Oregon...................... 3
ADMINISTRATION NOMINEES
Gerrish, Jeffrey, nominated to be Deputy United States Trade
Representative for Asia, Europe, the Middle East, and
Industrial Competitiveness, with the rank of Ambassador,
Executive Office of the President, Washington, DC.............. 6
Doud, Gregory, nominated to be Chief Agricultural Negotiator,
Office of the United States Trade Representative, with the rank
of Ambassador, Executive Office of the President, Washington,
DC............................................................. 8
Kearns, Jason, nominated to be a member of the United States
International Trade Commission, Washington, DC................. 9
ALPHABETICAL LISTING AND APPENDIX MATERIAL
Doud, Gregory:
Testimony.................................................... 8
Prepared statement........................................... 25
Biographical information..................................... 26
Responses to questions from committee members................ 31
Gerrish, Jeffrey:
Testimony.................................................... 6
Prepared statement........................................... 37
Biographical information..................................... 38
Responses to questions from committee members................ 43
Hatch, Hon. Orrin G.:
Opening statement............................................ 1
Prepared statement........................................... 52
Kearns, Jason:
Testimony.................................................... 9
Prepared statement........................................... 53
Biographical information..................................... 54
Responses to questions from committee members................ 58
Wyden, Hon. Ron:
Opening statement............................................ 3
Prepared statement........................................... 60
(iii)
NOMINATIONS OF JEFFREY GERRISH, TO BE
DEPUTY UNITED STATES TRADE
REPRESENTATIVE FOR ASIA, EUROPE, THE
MIDDLE EAST, AND INDUSTRIAL
COMPETITIVENESS, WITH THE RANK OF
AMBASSADOR, EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF THE
PRESIDENT; GREGORY DOUD, TO BE CHIEF
AGRICULTURAL NEGOTIATOR, OFFICE OF
THE UNITED STATES TRADE
REPRESENTATIVE, WITH THE RANK OF
AMBASSADOR, EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF THE
PRESIDENT; AND JASON KEARNS, TO BE A
MEMBER OF THE UNITED STATES
INTERNATIONAL TRADE COMMISSION
----------
THURSDAY, OCTOBER 5, 2017
U.S. Senate,
Committee on Finance,
Washington, DC.
The hearing was convened, pursuant to notice, at 10:38
a.m., in room SD-215, Dirksen Senate Office Building, Hon.
Orrin G. Hatch (chairman of the committee) presiding.
Present: Senators Roberts, Thune, Wyden, Stabenow,
Cantwell, Menendez, Cardin, Bennet, and Casey.
Also present: Republican Staff: Christopher Armstrong,
Chief Oversight Counsel; Rory Heslington, Professional Staff
Member; Shane Warren, Chief International Trade Counsel;
Nicholas Wyatt, Tax and Nominations Staff Member; and Andrew
Rollo, Detailee. Democratic Staff: Joshua Sheinkman, Staff
Director; Michael Evans, General Counsel; Elissa Alben, Senior
Trade Counsel; Ian Nicholson, Investigator; Greta Peisch,
Senior Trade Counsel; and Jayme White, Chief Advisor for
International Competitiveness and Innovation.
OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. ORRIN G. HATCH, A U.S. SENATOR FROM
UTAH, CHAIRMAN, COMMITTEE ON FINANCE
The Chairman. The committee will come to order. I want to
welcome everybody to today's hearing on pending nominations.
Today we will have the opportunity to hear testimony from
nominees to three key trade policy positions. We will hear from
Mr. Jeffrey Gerrish, who has been nominated to serve as Deputy
U.S. Trade Representative. We will also hear from Mr. Gregory
Doud, nominated to be Chief Agricultural Negotiator at the
Office of USTR. Last, but certainly not least, we will hear
from Mr. Jason Kearns, who has been tapped to serve as a member
of the International Trade Commission.
We welcome you, gentlemen, to the Senate Finance Committee.
I am sorry we are in such a bind here. I am supposed to be down
in Judiciary at the same time. There is a big uproar down
there, so I will do the best I can. But congratulations on your
nominations, and thank you for your willingness to serve in
these capacities.
When you look over the respective resumes of each of these
nominees, it is clear that the President has selected
individuals who are well-qualified and well-prepared to serve
in these important posts.
That is a good thing. There is quite a bit going on in the
trade world at the moment. The Trump administration has a
number of ambitious goals, and Congress has a key role to play
with all of them. Among other things, we need to make sure that
the administration is well-staffed, and I hope we will be able
to take some steps toward that end with the advancement of
these nominees.
I prefer to let the nominees describe their backgrounds and
qualifications on their own. However, I do want to address an
issue that has been raised with respect to Mr. Gerrish's
nomination. Members of the committee already have all of the
facts, and they are pretty straightforward.
Mr. Gerrish was a resident of Virginia until June 2016, at
which time he moved to Maryland. However, in November 2016, Mr.
Gerrish voted in the general election in the Commonwealth of
Virginia. Mr. Gerrish voted where he should not have. It is
that simple.
He has been open with the committee about this matter
during the vetting process and has cooperated with the
committee staff 's efforts to understand exactly what happened.
I am sure that Mr. Gerrish will be willing to respond to
questions about this matter today.
My hope is that at the end of today's hearing, committee
members will have enough information to judge each nominee on
the basis of their experience, knowledge, and qualifications
for the positions to which they have been nominated.
Now, with that out of the way, I want to once again thank
the nominees for being here today. I look forward to hearing
your statements and hopefully to working with you in the
future.
I may have to leave temporarily for the Judiciary Committee
as well, which is just down the hall, but we will see.
Right now, I will turn to my distinguished friend and
colleague, Senator Wyden, for his opening remarks.
[The prepared statement of Chairman Hatch appears in the
appendix.]
OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. RON WYDEN,
A U.S. SENATOR FROM OREGON
Senator Wyden. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. And you
are right: this is going to be a very hectic morning, even by
Senate standards, trying to get to everything.
The chairman has noted Mr. Jeffrey Gerrish has been
nominated to be the Deputy U.S. Trade Representative; Mr.
Gregory Doud to be Chief Agricultural Negotiator at the U.S.
Trade Representative; and Mr. Jason Kearns to be a member of
the United States International Trade Commission, a place where
I am so frequently they are thinking about getting me a mail
slot or something like that.
I want to start on this matter of Mr. Gerrish, because I
think we really want to unpack this and understand what
happened. I understand the facts. The chairman touched on this.
Mr. Gerrish moved residences from Virginia to Maryland in
June of last year. Though he no longer lived in Virginia, he
voted there in the 2016 general election. Virginia provides a
30-day grace period to former residents. This was way outside
what the law allowed.
It is hard to understand how an attorney as accomplished
and distinguished as Mr. Gerrish can walk out of his house in
Maryland, travel a ways to Virginia, and cast a vote in that
State without thinking there just may be an issue. You cannot
flash a Maryland driver's license when a Virginia polling place
worker asks you where you live. So this seems to me to be a
serious error in judgment on a part of the law that is pretty
unambiguous.
As of now, I think it is especially noteworthy that the
Republican and the Democratic member of the Fairfax County
Electoral Board have called for an investigation by the
prosecutor in this case. So I think this is an important
matter, and we are going to have to, even with the hectic
morning, get at this.
There is another reason, frankly, why I think this issue is
so important. This administration has fabricated out of thin
air a crisis of widespread voter fraud in this country without
one shred of evidence to back up their claims. Now, set aside
the irony of someone who won the election talking about how it
was tainted by fraud. Just kind of setting that one aside,
because that is kind of a head-scratcher--usually, the loser
says that there is a problem with voter fraud--this is a
particularly troubling matter, because we now have a so-called
Commission on Election Integrity, which looks more to me like
an attempt to justify taking away the vote from millions of
American citizens, particularly those who are black and Latino.
Bottom line: the administration makes illegal voting out to
be widespread and far-reaching, without any documentation. It
is, oh my goodness, this is happening in an extraordinary
number of cases, almost an existential threat to the country,
and here we are going to be dealing with a nomination where you
have the Republican and Democratic member of the local
electoral board raising questions about whether that was an
illegal vote in a highly contested State.
So this is important to get at, and we are determined to do
that.
Now, turning to the critical trade challenges that we face
today, I think it is fair to say the administration, after all
the talk, after all the ballyhoo, surely has disappointed.
In April, the President ordered the launch of
investigations into steel and aluminum imports. He said it was
a historic day, but so far it has been a historic blunder.
Failing to follow through on this tough talk has led to steel
imports jumping by 21 percent. You see the same pattern in
softwood lumber after the administration delayed imposing
duties on unfairly traded imports from Canada.
This is having a real impact on our country and on what I
call red, white, and blue jobs. By the President's own
preferred metric, the trade deficit, the U.S. is worse off this
year. The deficit rose by about $20 billion in the first 7
months of 2017.
The administration has also produced disappointing results
in its engagement with China. Although administration officials
touted a limited deal with China in late spring, labeling
something a good deal is very different from actually securing
a good deal. Our country has serious and far-reaching trade
issues with China, including with respect to cloud computing,
and what is needed is not more talk, but a concrete strategy.
I also have concerns about where the NAFTA negotiations are
going. As I am sure Mr. Doud can attest, trade is a complicated
deal. Entering into trade agreements can create winners and
losers, but so does withdrawing from them or fundamentally
changing their nature. There are lots of manufacturing and farm
jobs that depend on existing relationships, and the goal should
be to improve the relationships for everybody. And I think it
would be a big mistake to leave whole sectors of the economy
behind. I worry that this is a trade policy built on hostage-
taking and headlines, not the hard work of getting trade done
right through tough enforcement and a comprehensive strategy to
open up markets for the American brand.
The chairman and I and our colleagues worked very hard in
the last Congress to put together a tough trade enforcement
agenda, and as he, I know, is aware, that was tough, bringing
together the Senate Democrats and Republicans on it. But under
your leadership, Mr. Chairman, we got it done. We had an
agreement for tough enforcement and to really focus on opening
up markets. The reality is that this administration really has
not done what is necessary to follow up on that bipartisan
work.
Finally, we are glad to see Mr. Jason Kearns, nominated to
serve on the International Trade Commission, where he probably
will see me several times a week at the rate things are going.
I have had the opportunity to work with Mr. Kearns on the
Hill. He is very much aware of the ins and outs of trade
policy. I am especially pleased because he has always looked at
these issues in kind of the way the chairman and I have, and
that is to be driven by the facts and to be driven by the
evidence and not some prepackaged theory of what is politically
right and politically correct.
So I am glad that we are going to hear from him, and I am
confident that he is committed to policies that are going to
pay off for our workers.
I thank you, Mr. Chairman.
The Chairman. Thank you, Senator.
[The prepared statement of Senator Wyden appears in the
appendix.]
The Chairman. Let me just say that I would like to extend a
warm welcome to each of our nominees today. I appreciate you
all being here.
Before I introduce each of you in the order that you will
provide your testimony, let me just say that I am very pleased
to have you all here. Let me first recognize your friends and
families in the audience. We would welcome each of you to
introduce them when you open with your own testimony.
First, we will hear from Mr. Jeffrey Gerrish, who has been
nominated to serve as Deputy U.S. Trade Representative for
Asia, Europe, the Middle East, and for Industrial
Competitiveness, with the rank of Ambassador.
Mr. Gerrish is currently working as the head of the
International Trade Group at Skadden, where he started working
back in 1998. Mr. Gerrish has spent much of his legal career
focused on trade, practicing before the Department of Commerce,
the ITC, U.S. courts, and NAFTA and WTO panels. That is a lot
of experience.
Mr. Gerrish received his undergraduate degree from the
State University of New York and later graduated from Duke
University Law School.
Next will be Mr. Gregory Doud, who has been nominated to
serve as the Chief Agricultural Negotiator in the Office of the
U.S. Trade Representative, with the rank of Ambassador.
Mr. Doud will be introduced by our colleague, Senator
Roberts, and we are happy to have that occur.
Finally, we will hear from Mr. Jason Kearns, who will be
introduced by our good friend, colleague, and fellow committee
member, Senator Bennet. We are happy to have Senator Bennet do
that.
Senator Bennet, please proceed with your introduction. Is
he here?
We will start with Senator Roberts then.
Senator Roberts?
Senator Roberts. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
It is my understanding I have the distinct honor of
introducing Mr. Greg Doud. Is that correct?
The Chairman. That is correct.
Senator Roberts. Thank you, sir.
Greg is the nominee to be our Chief Ag Negotiator. Greg is
joined by his wife, Pennye, their two children, and his parents
at this hearing today.
Mr. Chairman, I would like for them to stand and be
recognized. Thank you. [Applause.]
I want this committee and everybody present to know that
Greg is a Kansan, born and raised. He is tied to the land,
playing a large role in operating his family farm near Mankato,
KS. He understands firsthand that for any farmer or rancher to
be successful in today's global economy, the United States must
sell not only what we make, but what we grow.
Greg's professional background in agricultural policy has
spanned over 20 years. An agriculture economist by education,
Greg began his career working in agricultural commodity
consulting and later working for the commodity trade
associations. During his time at the National Cattlemen's Beef
Association, Greg chaired the USDA /USTR Animal and Animal
Products Agricultural Trade Advisory Committee.
I want to emphasize Greg's experience as a trade policy
advisor for the Senate Agriculture Committee, during my time as
the ranking member. I often say, as a Senator, you are only as
good as your staff. I can honestly say that, when in the middle
of drafting a farm bill, I could not have asked for a smarter,
more talented, and yes, even stubborn, trade advisor.
Throughout the confirmation process, Greg and I have had
multiple conversations about agriculture trade. We have
discussed his priorities for expanding markets for agriculture
commodities, especially engaging with the Pacific Rim
countries. More importantly, we share the view that the
agriculture industry needs an administration that not only
focuses on expanding markets, but also one that will continue
to be a reliable supplier to our current trading partners.
That has been a U.S. trade policy hallmark, and I know that
Greg Doud will be a strong advocate. The agriculture industry
is in need of certainty, especially during the rough patch we
are currently experiencing. And, Greg, I know that you will be
the voice of farmers, ranchers, and growers, and I certainly
look forward to working with you and taking on this challenge.
Mr. Chairman, thank you for this privilege.
The Chairman. Thank you, Senator, for your kind remarks.
Let us begin. Mr. Gerrish, we will begin with you.
STATEMENT OF JEFFREY GERRISH, NOMINATED TO BE DEPUTY UNITED
STATES TRADE REPRESENTATIVE FOR ASIA, EUROPE, THE MIDDLE EAST,
AND INDUSTRIAL COMPETITIVENESS, WITH THE RANK OF AMBASSADOR,
EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT, WASHINGTON, DC
Mr. Gerrish. Chairman Hatch, Ranking Member Wyden, and
distinguished members of the Senate Finance Committee, it is a
great honor for me to appear before you today.
I feel both privileged and humbled to have been recommended
by Ambassador Lighthizer and nominated by President Trump to
serve as Deputy United States Trade Representative.
I would like to take a moment first to thank my wife Kelly
and our three children, Jacob, Kate, and Grace. They have been
a constant source of inspiration, strength, and support for me
throughout my career, and I would not be where I am today
without them. I would also like to thank the incredible mentors
and role models I have had over the years, including Ambassador
Lighthizer and my friend and former partner, John Mangan, who
is here with us today. I have been blessed with the opportunity
to work with and learn from many immensely talented individuals
and am truly grateful for that.
In addition, I would like to express my thanks to the
members and staff whom I have been able to visit with over the
past couple of months. If confirmed, I look forward to working
with you on the critical trade issues facing our great country.
To give you a little background about me, I grew up in a
city by the name of Troy in upstate New York. Troy used to be a
manufacturing town, with steel and then textiles the primary
goods produced there. The manufacturing is gone now, and the
city has faced difficult times, but the people of Troy remain
as fundamentally decent, down to earth, and hardworking as any
you will find. I was taught the value of a strong work ethic
from an early age by my parents and grandparents and others in
my hometown, and that virtue has remained with me and served me
well in every single thing that I have done.
For almost 20 years, I have practiced international trade
law. Over that time, I have worked extensively on behalf of
U.S. manufacturers in seeking to combat unfair trade in this
market, the massive subsidies and trade-distorting industrial
policies employed by countries around the world, and the
challenge of global overcapacity facing a number of industries.
I have fought for strong enforcement of our trade laws and to
preserve U.S. policies at the World Trade Organization and
other international bodies. My work has also entailed assisting
American companies that have been improperly denied access to
other markets around the world.
Through my work, I know firsthand the problems that unfair
trade can cause, but also the opportunities that trade can
present for U.S. companies. My experience has clearly
demonstrated to me that we need a trade policy that puts
America first. This does not mean closing ourselves off from
the rest of the world. It simply means putting American
manufacturers, workers, farmers, ranchers, and service
providers first in everything we do in the trade arena.
It means negotiating stronger and more effective trade
agreements and ensuring that the trade agreements we have are
properly enforced and applied in the manner originally
intended. We must aggressively and effectively apply our trade
laws to counteract unfair trade practices and work with like-
minded trading partners to defend the use of such trade laws
and to address the enormous overcapacity problem plaguing our
steel, aluminum, and other industries.
For our creators and innovators, it means promoting greater
intellectual property protection and enforcement among our
trading partners. It is absolutely critical that we protect
American companies' intellectual property, which is one of our
greatest assets.
If confirmed, I hope to work with this committee, others in
Congress, those in the administration, and all interested
parties to craft and implement a trade policy that increases
trade and spurs economic growth, but does so in a way that
promotes fair and reciprocal trade that benefits all segments
of our economy.
The trade issues confronting the United States are numerous
and daunting, and I would welcome the opportunity to work with
you in tackling them. If confirmed, I promise you that I will
bring my strong international trade experience to bear and will
work tirelessly to achieve the best possible results for your
constituents and the country.
Thank you for your consideration, and I would be happy to
answer any questions.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Gerrish appears in the
appendix.]
Senator Roberts [presiding]. Thank you, Mr. Gerrish.
Mr. Doud, please proceed.
STATEMENT OF GREGORY DOUD, NOMINATED TO BE CHIEF AGRICULTURAL
NEGOTIATOR, OFFICE OF THE U.S. TRADE REPRESENTATIVE, WITH THE
RANK OF AMBASSADOR, EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT,
WASHINGTON, DC
Mr. Doud. Thank you, Senator. Chairman Hatch, Ranking
Member Wyden, members of the Senate Finance Committee, thank
you for welcoming me here today. I am honored to be considered
by this committee as President Trump's nominee to be the Chief
Agriculture Negotiator in the Office of the United States Trade
Representative.
I would first like to recognize my wife, Dr. Pennye Doud;
our children, Abby and Aidan; my parents, Eldon and JoAnn Doud
from Mankato, KS; and my in-laws, Major U.S. Army Retired
Nelson Stammer, a Vietnam War veteran, and his wife Barbara. I
am grateful for Pennye's willingness to allow me to serve our
country and its farmers and ranchers in this capacity.
Growing up on the farm in Kansas, I have vivid memories of
the economic difficulties that followed the decision to embargo
U.S. sales of wheat to the Soviet Union. After graduate school,
I jumped at the opportunity to work for U.S. Wheat Associates,
which immediately exposed me to the multitude and complexity of
challenges that we face in selling our wheat overseas.
As chief economist for the National Cattlemen's Beef
Association, I spent each day for over 7 years coordinating
industry efforts with USTR, USDA, and even our State Department
as we rebuilt our beef exports virtually from scratch in the
aftermath of the BSE cow that stole the Christmas of 2003.
While in that role, I also served as a cleared advisor and
later chairman of the USDA /USTR Animal and Animal Products
Agriculture Advisory Committee. This was during an extremely
active period when we had trade agreements with Australia,
Bahrain, Colombia, the CAFTA, South Korea, Morocco, Panama, and
Peru.
America's farmers and ranchers understand that their future
and their new wealth, as Thomas Jefferson would put it, depends
on the ability to export the food and fiber they grow to the 95
percent of the world's population that does not live in the
United States. They also understand, as do I, that these
efforts can take years to accomplish and require a unique
combination of strategy and relationship building.
I have spent the vast majority of my career involved in
wheat, soybean, and beef export market development efforts, in
addition to serving as senior professional staff on the Senate
Agriculture Committee, responsible for trade matters. If
confirmed, I would consider it an honor and privilege to join
Ambassador Lighthizer and the team at USTR, which is dedicated
to creating new wealth for U.S. agriculture.
As I have discussed with Ambassador Lighthizer, when it
comes to trade agreements, U.S. agriculture plays offense. Our
Nation's farmers and ranchers grow world-class products and
should be able to export to any market in the world and be
competitive. If confirmed as Chief Agricultural Negotiator, I
will work to reduce barriers to U.S. agriculture and secure
greater market access for America's farmers and ranchers.
One area where we need work is Japan. We are at a
particularly critical juncture in terms of our competitiveness
for U.S. meat exports into Japan. Failure to address this
situation immediately does not bode well for our fiercely
competitive and rapidly expanding production of beef, pork, and
poultry. In fact, this is not only true for Japan, but for all
of Southeast Asia as well.
Keeping in mind that the evolution to more liberalized
trade in agriculture products takes a great deal of patience,
we must also get started today in planting new trees in market
access, even though it may be quite some time before we are
able to enjoy shade from these efforts. In this category, India
certainly comes to mind as a place which, before long, could
grow to be the most heavily populated nation on the planet.
If confirmed, I look forward to working with Ambassador
Lighthizer and the stellar team of professionals at USTR to
expand markets for U.S. agriculture. I look forward to working
with you, Chairman Hatch, Ranking Member Wyden, and the members
of this committee, to drive a strategy consistent with the
objectives of Trade Promotion Authority toward reality.
Again, I thank the President for this opportunity, and the
committee for considering my nomination. I am happy to answer
any questions.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Doud appears in the
appendix.]
Senator Wyden [presiding]. Thank you very much, Mr. Doud.
Mr. Kearns?
STATEMENT OF JASON KEARNS, NOMINATED TO BE A MEMBER OF THE
UNITED STATES INTERNATIONAL TRADE COMMISSION, WASHINGTON, DC
Mr. Kearns. Thank you. Chairman Hatch, Ranking Member
Wyden, members of the Finance Committee, I am honored to appear
before you today as the President's nominee for the position of
Commissioner on the U.S. International Trade Commission.
I would like to introduce the family members who are with
me here today. I would not be here without the love and
constant support of my wife, Lindy Arnof Kearns, who manages
the logistical mess of our busy lives, while adding levity to
our home. When I complain the glass is half empty, she always
reminds me that it is half full. I am also very proud of my
three children: Eleanore, who is 14; Keevan, who is 12; and
Sander, who is 9. They keep things in perspective for me.
Senator Wyden. Whenever my kids come, the question is, did
they come voluntarily, or were they required to? [Laughter.]
But we will get into that at another time. Mr. Kearns, go
ahead.
Mr. Kearns. I was happy this did not happen over the summer
when they were at summer camp, because it would be a different
answer. But now they are at school.
My mother, Betsy Starks, has taught me to stand up for my
principles and to stick to them. And I am proud of my sister,
Lauren Sulcove, who serves as First Assistant District Attorney
in Franklin County, PA. Yesterday she accepted a new job as
Deputy Attorney General for the State of Pennsylvania.
I would like to thank all of my family, those who are
living and those who have passed, for all of their support over
the years. I also thank my mentors, colleagues, and friends for
their help.
I seek this position after serving the past 11 years as
trade counsel to the House Committee on Ways and Means. I want
to thank Ways and Means for that honor. I also want to express
my appreciation to Representatives Levin and Rangel and Senator
Wyden for first recommending my appointment as a Commissioner
several years ago, and to Presidents Obama and Trump for
nominating me.
I am also grateful to Senate Minority Leader Schumer for
his support, as well as the support I have received from this
committee, including the chairman, the ranking member, and
Senator Bennet, from my great home State of Colorado.
The ITC administers the trade remedy laws or, as Senator
Isakson so aptly put it in our meeting last week, it serves as
an umpire, calling balls and strikes. The ITC also provides
Congress and the executive branch with independent analysis and
information on matters relating to tariffs and international
trade; that is, the raw materials from which policymakers like
you may craft and execute trade policy.
In my view, the work of the ITC may be more important today
than ever before, as trade has become a much larger part of our
economy and as policymakers consider and debate major trade
policy reforms.
I believe my upbringing, education, and work experience
have prepared me well for this role. I grew up in a farming
town of 500 people in Colorado, where I learned to enjoy hard
work, whether it was the midnight feedings of my 4H lambs or
being the first kid at my high school in the mornings to work
on my jump shot.
In small towns, you learn to do your part and you learn to
try to get along, and that is where I developed a deep respect
for people who work with their hands for a living. Since moving
away from that small town, I have learned about trade from a
wide variety of perspectives over more than 20 years. I have
counseled Democratic members of Congress, as well as Republican
trade officials at USTR, including my former boss, Senator
Portman.
Before that, in private practice, I counseled businesses
that petitioned the ITC for relief under the trade remedy laws,
as well as businesses that opposed relief. I have counseled
exporters, as well as importers. I have been honored to serve
as an advocate for these clients.
I now look forward to serving in a different role, not as
an advocate, but as an impartial, independent, and objective
decision-maker and source of information and analysis.
If confirmed, I will administer the trade remedy laws
fairly, objectively, and in accordance with congressional
intent, and I will work with my fellow Commissioners to respond
as fully and quickly as possible to congressional and
administration requests, with the most reliable information and
independent and insightful analysis possible.
Thank you for your consideration.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Kearns appears in the
appendix.]
Senator Wyden. Thank you very much.
Senator Bennet would like to give you a post-statement
introduction.
Senator Bennet. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. This is highly
unusual, but we are in the middle of three votes, if you can be
in the middle of three votes. We are among three votes.
But I really wanted to come, Mr. Chairman, to introduce,
but now welcome Jason Kearns, nominee to serve as Commissioner
on the U.S. International Trade Commission.
I want to thank Jason for his prior service in the House of
Representatives in the previous administration, and for his
continued willingness to serve. I also want to thank his family
for joining us today. Jason and his family may no longer live
in Colorado, but we claim them as our own, and I know they
often travel back to ski and spend time outdoors. In fact, I
think we may have compared notes on the hike between Crested
Butte and Aspen this summer.
Few Americans know about the International Trade
Commission, but it works to create fairness and a level playing
field in our system of trade by enforcing our trade laws. The
Commission protects our intellectual property rights and
safeguards American industries from dumping and subsidies.
Jason understands that well. It is not just because he studied
at some of our Nation's top institutions. It is not just his
extensive experience in trade enforcement and investment. It is
because he understands how trade can affect small towns across
America and the importance of enforcement for American workers.
He knows that because he grew up in the small farming town
of Keenesburg, about 40 miles northeast of Denver, in Colorado.
Jason understands that without enforcement, rules are just
words on a piece of paper. Throughout his career, Jason has
demonstrated a clear commitment to enforcement and more
generally to U.S. trade policies that allow American workers to
compete fairly in the global economy.
I thank Jason for his willingness to serve in this
important role, and I commend him to this committee.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Senator Wyden. Thank you very much, Senator Bennet.
Now, on behalf of Chairman Hatch--and as we have indicated,
this is really a very frenetic day even by Senate standards.
The chairman would normally do this, but we have some
obligatory questions that have to be asked of all nominees. So
I am asking these on behalf of the chairman.
First, to all three of you, is there anything that you are
aware of in your background that might present a conflict of
interest with the duties of the office to which you have been
nominated? We need an answer from each of you.
Mr. Gerrish?
Mr. Gerrish. No, there is not, Senator.
Senator Wyden. Mr. Doud?
Mr. Doud. No, Senator.
Mr. Kearns. No, sir.
Senator Wyden. Do you know of any reason, personal or
otherwise, that would in any way prevent you from fully and
honorably discharging the responsibilities of the office to
which you have been nominated? Again, each of you.
Mr. Gerrish. No, Senator.
Mr. Doud. No, Senator.
Mr. Kearns. No, sir.
Senator Wyden. Very good. Do you agree, without
reservation, to respond to any reasonable summons to appear and
testify before any duly constituted committee of the Congress,
if you are confirmed?
Mr. Gerrish. Yes, Senator.
Mr. Doud. Yes, Senator.
Mr. Kearns. Yes.
Senator Wyden. Finally, do you commit to provide a prompt
response in writing to any questions addressed to you by any
Senator of the committee?
Mr. Gerrish. Yes, I do.
Mr. Doud. Yes.
Mr. Kearns. Yes, I will.
Senator Wyden. Very good. I am going to start with some
questions. As I say, we are going to have colleagues coming in.
Mr. Gerrish, I have some questions for you that I would
like just a ``yes'' or ``no'' answer to, particularly since, as
you heard in my opening statement, I am concerned when you have
both the Republican member and the Democratic member of the
local election board expressing some concern.
Did you know you were breaking the law? That is a ``yes''
or ``no'' answer.
Mr. Gerrish. No, Senator.
Senator Wyden. How did you happen to vote in this
particular election? You no longer lived in Virginia, but you
voted there in the 2016 general election. Virginia provides a
30-day grace period to former residents. That is way outside
the law.
So it is just kind of hard to understand how a skilled
attorney could be voting in a place where he no longer lives.
Let us talk about that. How did this happen?
Mr. Gerrish. Thank you, Senator. I would be happy to answer
that.
My family and I lived in Virginia for over 18 years before
moving to Maryland last summer. At the time of the election, I
still had my Virginia driver's license. My car was still
registered in Virginia. I was still responsible for paying
personal property taxes in Virginia.
I believed that there was a grace period and that I still
had time under that grace period to be able to transfer
everything over to Maryland and to be able to continue to vote
in Virginia, where I was registered to vote and had voted since
first moving to this area over 18 years before.
Based on that understanding, I did vote in Virginia in the
election. And I understood that there was a grace period and
that I could continue to vote in Virginia. I had no ill intent,
no wrongful intent. I did not think that I was doing anything
wrong.
I believed that I was just doing what I had a right and an
ability to do and, in fact, a civic duty to do, which was vote
in the election.
Senator Wyden. You had a civic duty to vote in a place you
no longer lived. I just want to make sure I am not hearing it
wrong.
Mr. Gerrish. Senator, I believed I had----
Senator Wyden. That is a ``yes'' or ``no.'' You felt you
had a civic duty to vote in a place you no longer lived?
Mr. Gerrish. Yes. I believed I had a civic duty to vote in
the election, and I believed I still had the ability----
Senator Wyden. That was not the question I asked. So let
the record reflect that the witness did not answer the
question.
Did you buy a new house and move from Virginia to Maryland
in June of 2016, roughly 5 months before the 2016 election day?
Mr. Gerrish. Yes. We moved to Maryland at the end of June.
So it was just over 4 months before the election.
Senator Wyden. Did you vote in Virginia for the 2016
presidential election even though you were then a resident of
Maryland?
Mr. Gerrish. Yes, I did. But I believed that I still had a
grace period and had time to be able to vote in Virginia during
that time. And I had been registered to vote in Virginia and
had voted in Virginia for over 18 years at that point. So I
really did not think that there was an issue.
I believed I was still within the grace period, and it was
an honest, good faith oversight on my part. I did not look into
or research what the grace period actually was, and I wish I
had.
Senator Wyden. Under Virginia election law, you were
required to confirm orally or in writing to an election
official or a poll worker that you still lived at your previous
Virginia residence in order to vote.
Did you do that when you voted in Virginia for the 2016
presidential election?
Mr. Gerrish. I do not believe I did. My recollection is I
went in, I told them my name, I gave them my driver's license,
they checked my name off a list, handed me a ballot, and told
me where to go to vote.
Senator Wyden. The Virginia election law says you are
required to confirm to an election official that you still
lived at your previous Virginia residence.
Are you saying the Virginia election officials messed up
and did not get into it with you?
Again, for somebody like yourself, a very skilled lawyer--I
am a lawyer too. I am a lawyer in name only. I do not have your
skills. This is just getting a little bit implausible.
Are you saying the Virginia election officials messed up
and they did not ask you to confirm in some way that you still
lived at your previous residence?
Mr. Gerrish. No. I do not believe that they asked me to do
that, and my recollection is that I just walked in and handed
them my driver's license, and they checked off my name on a
list.
Senator Wyden. Do you think you ought to be held to a
different legal standard than any other Virginia or Maryland
voter seeking to vote in the 2016 election?
Mr. Gerrish. I do not believe so. I am an attorney, you are
absolutely right. I have close to 20 years of experience as an
international trade lawyer. I am not an expert in election law
or certainly not Virginia election law.
I believed that I had a grace period and that I was within
that grace period and still had time under the grace period to
vote in Virginia, where I was registered to vote and had voted
for over 18 years. And so I do not believe so.
This was truly a good faith oversight on my part and
something I certainly wish I had looked into and had
researched. And it is not consistent with how I normally would
conduct myself.
I think people who know me would say that I am a
conscientious, diligent, thorough person, and I simply did not
look into this or research this.
Senator Wyden. My time is up. This last answer is important
to me.
So what you are saying is that you now realize that you
made a serious mistake, (a), and (b), you should have taken the
time to figure out what the rules and the laws were so that
this serious mistake had not happened.
Mr. Gerrish. I do realize that I should have looked into
this and I wish I had, and I simply did not look into it. I
believed I was still within that grace period, and it was just
simply and purely a good faith oversight on my part.
Senator Wyden. Mr. Chairman, my time is up. We have also
been joined by Senator Menendez. Can he be recognized?
The Chairman. Yes. Go ahead.
Senator Wyden. Very good.
Senator Menendez. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Gerrish, when this committee was debating Trade
Promotion Authority 2 years ago, it passed my amendment into
law that barred fast-track procedures for any trade agreement
with a country on Tier 3 of the State Department's Trafficking
in Persons Report, a group of countries that failed to combat
human trafficking. Following that amendment, we saw an
unprecedented politicalization of the TIP report, where
countries were upgraded based on unrelated factors, one of
those being trade, in my opinion.
If confirmed, you will oversee our trading relationships
with several countries that have poor records on combating
human trafficking. Will you commit to us that, if confirmed,
you will not take any action to attempt to influence the TIP
report, the Trafficking in Persons report?
Mr. Gerrish. Yes, I will confirm that, Senator, and I will
act in accordance with the requirements of TPA.
Senator Menendez. Will the administration seek to
negotiate, to your knowledge, any trade agreements with
countries currently or recently on Tier 3 of the TIP report?
Mr. Gerrish. Senator, I, of course, am not in the
administration and do not know what discussions have taken
place.
Senator Menendez. In preparation for this hearing, I am
sure you have had some conversations. Do you have any
understanding from those preparations that they intend to
pursue such?
Mr. Gerrish. I have no understanding of those preparations.
Senator Menendez. I hope you will be an advocate of
observing the law that Congress put into effect.
Mr. Gerrish. I will, Senator, and, if confirmed, I look
forward to working with you to make sure that we do that.
Senator Menendez. Let me ask you: when Ambassador
Lighthizer was last before this committee in June, he
emphasized how important it is that we obtain enforceable labor
provisions in agreements. Recent press reports suggest that the
administration is advocating for an optional dispute settlement
mechanism as it relates to NAFTA, which could be--I know you
are not going to be involved in NAFTA from the position you
have been nominated to, but it could be a forerunner of other
agreements as we look at other countries.
That would mean that parties could choose whether or not to
subject themselves to the enforcement of the deal, including
labor obligations. Do you believe that an optional dispute
mechanism is an effective way to make our labor obligations
enforceable by other countries?
Mr. Gerrish. Senator, I do not know the exact details of
what this optional dispute settlement mechanism would be and
what issues it would cover and whether it would cover labor or
just other types of issues.
I do think it is important for us to have strong and
enforceable labor provisions in our trade agreements and
certainly would work to do that and look for----
Senator Menendez. So you say you do not know the specifics.
Let me ask you abstractly, since you are an expert attorney.
With parties choosing whether or not to subject themselves
to the enforcement of the deal, what is the value of having a
deal, whether it be about labor or any other element? Where the
parties can choose whether or not to subject themselves to the
enforcement of the deal, how is that ultimately a truly
enforceable deal?
Mr. Gerrish. I think there may be situations where it is
appropriate to have optional dispute settlement as part of an
agreement. However, I understand your point and I understand
the concern, and certainly, if confirmed, I would want to work
with you to ensure that we have strong and enforceable
provisions.
Senator Menendez. An optional dispute settlement would be
maybe an alternative way of still submitting yourselves to the
obligations of the agreement, but finding a different way; for
example, arbitration. That is a little different than what is
being discussed here.
Let me turn to one other question with you.
Back in April, the President said he would be willing to
accommodate China in our trade disputes if they applied
pressure to deal with North Korea. He then went on to say that
labeling China a currency manipulator would be
counterproductive to securing that cooperation. But back in
June, the President conceded this strategy did not work.
So my question to you, now that the President has
acknowledged that China is either unable or unwilling to put
pressure on North Korea, will you recommend to Ambassador
Lighthizer and the President to follow through with the trade
enforcement measures that the President called for during the
campaign?
Mr. Gerrish. Senator, I believe we need to take strong
enforcement measures against China, where appropriate. I think
there are a number of issues we have with China, and it is
going to be important for us, if I am confirmed, to get in
there and assess all the different issues and for us to use all
the tools available to us under U.S. law and under the WTO
agreements to be able to take strong action against China.
Senator Menendez. I am going to follow up with you. I have
some questions for the record. My time has just about expired.
But I am looking forward to hearing your specifics on that.
Finally, Mr. Kearns, let me ask you: my understanding is
that the antidumping and countervailing duty statute right now
does not give purchasers and end users the same legal status as
domestic producers, importers, or even foreign exporters or
governments. They are not regarded as so-called interested
parties.
I also understand that the ITC sends out questionnaires to
purchasers and end users and demands that they answer, with one
reason being that the information from the purchasers and end
users is among the most valuable to the ITC in determining how
competition is occurring in the U.S. market.
There are manufacturing jobs in New Jersey that could be
impacted by the ITC's determination in this area. So I want to
understand, and this is my one question, how much value and
weight do you think the Commission should place on submissions
from purchasers and end users?
Mr. Kearns. Thank you, Senator. In private practice, I was
very involved in reviewing those kinds of questionnaires, and I
was always very impressed by the fact that both producers in
the domestic industry, as well as purchasers, seemed to answer
those questions very carefully, thoroughly, and without bias
one way or the other.
So I do believe that their input can be very valuable to
the process.
Senator Menendez. I have a follow-up question, but I will
yield, since my time is up.
The Chairman. Thank you, Senator.
Senator Roberts, are you next?
Senator Roberts. Yes. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
As we progress in the renegotiation of NAFTA, pretty much
the ag industry has made it clear that the number one priority
is to do no harm. NAFTA has widely been viewed as successful,
at least within the agriculture community and all those
related, and also successful for all three countries: Canada,
Mexico, and the United States.
The administration is reportedly considering proposals such
as season-based trade remedies or dispute resolution mechanisms
that could have a broad impact on U.S. agriculture.
All three, really quickly. What do you view as the
appropriate measure of doing no harm to agriculture and NAFTA
and other existing agreements, like the free trade agreement
with Korea or in new agreements with the Pacific Rim countries?
Mr. Gerrish, why don't you just start off ? Really quickly,
please.
Mr. Gerrish. Thank you, Senator. I agree with you, we
should do no harm. Where certain segments of the economy have
done well under particular trade agreements, we should seek to
build on that and expand our trade opportunities and knock down
barriers in other markets where we can do so.
I think we should also try to fix whatever problems there
are in the various agreements, and there have been a number of
problems identified with NAFTA and with the Korea-U.S. free
trade agreement, and those are issues we should address both in
terms of implementation issues, but also in terms of making
modifications and amendments, where appropriate.
But I agree with your sentiment. I would take the
Hippocratic oath and agree to do no harm where we have
benefitted under these agreements.
Senator Roberts. Greg?
Mr. Doud. Senator, it is hard to overstate the importance
of NAFTA to U.S. agriculture. Those are our second and third
biggest markets.
I think the number is, they account for $38 billion of
about $138 billion in U.S. agricultural exports, just those two
countries. I saw a statistic the other day--that amounts to
287,000 jobs in the U.S., just agriculture to the NAFTA
countries.
So there are things that we can upgrade. And with regard to
Korea, that is an enormously important market for meat. That
40-percent tariff that we had in beef, bringing that down, has
made that an over $1 billion market for us now on the beef side
of the equation.
There are always ways you can improve these markets, but we
have to maintain them, Senator.
Senator Roberts. Mr. Kearns?
Mr. Kearns. Senator, I think that question is a policy
question that is best directed to USTR. I can say, if I were
confirmed at the ITC, I would provide as much technical
assistance as I could to USTR and to the committee about what
agricultural trade looks like. But I think that is a policy
question that I would not really be asked to entertain at the
ITC.
Senator Roberts. I do not think we made a first and ten on
that one.
What, in your opinion, is the nexus between trade and our
national security? Mr. Gerrish?
Mr. Gerrish. Senator, my focus certainly is going to be
purely on trade issues and ensuring that our companies and our
farmers----
Senator Roberts. Okay. Fine. Greg?
Mr. Doud. Senator, if we can keep the world fed, they are
going to stay a lot calmer.
Senator Roberts. Mr. Kearns?
Mr. Kearns. Again, I think that the ITC can provide a lot
of technical assistance and help in understanding what impact
trade can have on a variety of U.S. industries, including the
ones related to national security.
Senator Roberts. I think if you plant the American flag on
trade, you also plant the American flag where we can certainly
be in a better position with regard to our national security.
It sends a signal to our trading partners, but also sends a
signal to our adversaries, and that was the answer I was
looking for.
Mr. Chairman, I have been involved in, I think, seven
different trade pacts in my career of public service, and they
are all oversold and they are all over-criticized, but there is
a sweet spot there that we can get to. And I know, Greg, you
are going to do a good job in leading that effort.
But we also have an ideological approach, more especially
in this administration, on what we think should be policy
objectives to put into trade bills. As a matter of fact, we
heard from the White House Counsel on Trade who had 34 policy
objectives, some of which we had already taken action on to
take out of the context of public law.
I do not know if you have any comments on that. I am not
going to ask you that. I am just going to make the point that
if we do not do something quickly, this farm situation is going
to become even more difficult, and it is difficult right now.
To use a term of my predecessor way back in the House days,
you either have to sell it or smell it, and we are about right
there. We have to export our products.
So I would ask you to consider--and my time has run out,
and we will just toss this out as an admonition. Do what you
can to get our trade policy back to being robust and a reliable
supplier and quit letting countries take our markets, because
that is what they are doing right now, and that is what farmers
and ranchers and growers are upset about, as well as everybody
within the related industries in agriculture.
Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
The Chairman. Thank you.
Senator Casey?
Senator Casey. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I thank the
nominees for being here.
I want to say first, I know that this issue has been raised
about voting, because one of the nominees has an issue there.
But I will tell you, when I look at this issue from the
perspective of my home State, where we take the franchise very
seriously and we have had lots of elections where it was never
in question whether or not the State would erect barriers to
voting, unfortunately, a number of years ago, just before the
2012 election, the general assembly passed and the Governor
signed a so-called voter ID law, and it was an embarrassment.
It was an insult to the people.
It was ultimately struck down, but when I consider the
obsession that has gripped at least one political party here in
town, where we know that between 2000 and 2014, there were 31
credible instances of in-person voter fraud out of a billion
votes cast, and then you have a commission and all kinds of
statements about voter fraud--I mean, it is really outrageous
and ridiculous.
I think the arguments that have been made in Washington on
this alleged voter fraud do not pass a very serious, but
important test, the hysterical laughter test, which means when
you assert something and the entire world laughs at it because
it is so absurd because there is no evidence to support it, it
is probably not true.
I know it is not the only thing we are here to talk about,
but I think it is of great concern to me, the statements that
have been made about voter fraud, both within Pennsylvania and
across the country. So I hope we can be serious about these
issues.
Mr. Doud, I do not have a lot of time. I just wanted to ask
you one question about specialty crops. A substantial part of
our farm economy is specialty crops. I know you spoke to our
staff about this issue.
In particular, you were learning more about the demands on
our farmers who produce specialty crops. Could you tell us how
you would approach trade issues related to specialty crops and
how you would balance those needs with commodity crops and how
you would address the divisions between specialty producers
from various parts of the country, as is being borne out in the
current NAFTA negotiation?
Mr. Doud. Senator, I think one of the things we can say
about agriculture and trade agreements is, it is all for one
and one for all.
Agriculture, the entire industry, does stick together on
these agreements. I have not been briefed yet on the specifics
of where things stand with regard to specialty crops and what
the proposals are or what the plans are. But this is a very
serious issue.
I look forward to working with you and seeing what can be
done here to address this and making sure that, at the end of
the day, we can keep agriculture together and everybody is
pulling forward with regard to having an agreement that
everyone can support.
Senator Casey. Thank you. I will submit some other
questions for the record, Mr. Chairman. I will yield back the
time. Thank you.
The Chairman. Thank you.
Senator Cardin?
Senator Cardin. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I welcome all
three of our nominees and thank you for your willingness to
serve our country.
Mr. Gerrish, I want to talk a little bit about trade
policy. The responsibility for trade policy rests with the
Congress. We delegate that to the administration because it is
a little cumbersome for 535 of us to negotiate. So we delegate
it to the executive branch, but we provide the parameters on
which those negotiations should take place.
In the most recent Trade Promotion Authority legislation,
we included as the principal trade negotiating objective
dealing with good governance, dealing with capacity-building,
dealing with human rights, dealing with anticorruption. In TPP,
we saw progress made on all of those fronts. I understand that
is no longer there, but there were agreements reached at the
negotiating level that included this chapter, which was novel.
I have been here long enough to know that unless it is in
the core agreements and there are trade sanctions, you are not
going to make the progress, and that you need to make progress
prior to the implementation of the trade agreements, because
after they are implemented, it is extremely difficult to get
progress made.
I would just like to hear your commitment, if confirmed, to
carry out this principal trade negotiating objective and how
important you believe it is that our trading partners,
particularly if we are dealing with countries that do not share
our same democratic principles, how important it is to build up
these capacities.
Mr. Gerrish. Thank you, Senator. And I do commit to abide
by the requirements of the most recent Trade Promotion
Authority legislation.
And I do understand and agree with your point on it being
important to have everything in the actual agreement itself to
make sure that there are strong and enforceable provisions. I
know we have had some experiences with that, including under
NAFTA, where that has not been the case.
I think it is important for us to make sure that we do, in
fact, do that going forward, and I certainly commit to you to
comply with the requirements of TPA.
Senator Cardin. I appreciate that. You are good to bring up
NAFTA, because NAFTA, at the time, was very forward-thinking to
include environment and labor in a trade agreement. The problem
was, it was not in the core agreement. It was not enforceable
through trade sanctions. So it really was not able to be
enforced.
The same concerns are more difficult in good governance,
because even if it is in the core agreements and even if there
are trade sanctions, good governance is more difficult to
quantitate. So it requires a real commitment to establish the
guideposts for how you are going to make those decisions.
For example, you can enact laws, but if you do not enforce
the laws, then you are not doing what you said you were going
to do. There is a lack of capacity. So unless we put in the
trade agreements the resources to build capacity and we have
ways of knowing when it is achieved, you are not going to reach
where you need to be.
My point is--and I think your reference to NAFTA is very
important--we are in new territory here, and if the United
States does not lead on this, no other country will. And it is
in the interest of our companies for the United States to lead
in this area.
So I appreciate that you will follow our direction, which
you would be required to do, I believe. But how important is
this to you as we try to expand opportunities for American
companies?
Mr. Gerrish. Senator, I think it is very important for the
United States to lead the charge on these issues that you have
raised, and, if confirmed, I would look forward to the
opportunity to work with you and with the other members of the
committee in terms of how we could, in fact, do that in a
practical way.
So I hope I do have the opportunity to do that, and I do
think it is important for us to lead the charge.
Senator Cardin. Well, I will follow up on that. If you are
confirmed, I really will ask that you work with this committee
and work with the members of this committee who have a direct
interest in it.
There are some good standards on anticorruption. There are
areas where we can make specific progress. We would ask that,
as you carry out that responsibility, you engage us so that, at
the end of the day, we are on the same page.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
The Chairman. Thank you.
Senator Thune?
Senator Thune. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. And thank all of
you for appearing before the committee today and for your
willingness to serve in the positions to which you have been
nominated by the President.
Mr. Doud, given their importance to agriculture and the
U.S. economy, would you describe how you would work to preserve
existing trade agreements and to open up new markets?
Mr. Doud. Well, Senator, I think the first thing we have to
do is work to preserve NAFTA. There are opportunities where we
can do better with regard to--dairy in Canada, I think, is an
important issue. We have recently discussed the specialty crop
issue.
As I mentioned in my testimony, Senator, we also have to
play offense, and I think at the top of that list is Japan. I
think for agriculture, in particular on the meat side, we are
growing and we are growing very, very rapidly, and that
southeast Asian part of the world is the best opportunity we
have to sell those products. So we have to maintain what we
have, but we have to grow.
Another place where I think there is a lot of work to be
done--it is going to be difficult--is China, and that is a day-
to-day, week-to-week, month-to-month slog.
Senator Thune. Well, I hope you will keep slogging it out,
because those are really important markets. And in the wake of
TPP being withdrawn from, I think we really have to be very
aggressive in trying to enter into bilateral agreements with
some of these countries that represent, I think, huge market
opportunities for American agriculture, among other industry
sectors.
The 2014 farm bill established the position of Under
Secretary for Trade and Foreign Agricultural Affairs at USDA,
but the previous administration never filled the position. The
Ag Committee recently held a confirmation hearing for Mr. Ted
McKinney, who was President Trump's nominee for this important
position.
If confirmed, will you commit to working with the USDA
Under Secretary for Trade to ensure that USDA is present during
ag trade negotiations?
Mr. Doud. Yes, Senator, I will. That provision in the farm
bill, I was the senior professional staffer on the Ag Committee
at the time when we did that in the farm bill, and I am very
happy that that got in there.
I have known Mr. McKinney, I believe, for nearly 30 years,
and we both have been members of the Farm Foundation in recent
years, and I very much look forward to working with him.
Senator Thune. Great. This I will direct not only to you,
but also to Mr. Gerrish, and that is the question about the
European Union using its free trade agreements to create de
facto non-tariff barriers for our ag exports by misusing
geographical indications.
The EU is now intent on doing that in its FTAs with Japan
and Mexico, which is very concerning to me, as Japan and Mexico
are two of our largest export markets. Restrictions in those
markets on U.S. products would be unacceptable.
How will you work to prevent those types of unfounded
barriers to trade and ensure that our trading partners know
there will be consequences if they choose to block our products
simply to curry favor with the European Union?
Mr. Doud and Mr. Gerrish, I would like to hear from both of
you on this.
Mr. Doud. Senator, that geographic indicator issue is a top
priority. It is just not something that we could possibly ever
tolerate.
The multitude of sanitary and phytosanitary issues of non-
tariff trade barriers with the European Union is a very, very
long list, and the ability to keep that sentiment from
spreading around the world is why we have to continue to work
every day to have access for our markets.
They have been doing this for a long time, and we have to
put a stop to it.
Senator Thune. Mr. Gerrish?
Mr. Gerrish. Senator, I completely agree with Mr. Doud. I
think the geographical indications issue is a top priority. We
have to work bilaterally with our trading partners, including
Mexico and Japan, to counteract that, to work against it, to
make sure that they do not adopt those barriers to our exports.
I think it is also coming up outside the agricultural area
with the EU as well, with their standardization requirements
that they are trying to impose through their free trade
agreements.
So we need to work bilaterally with Mexico and Japan and
others to ensure that those are not adopted and they do not act
as barriers to our exports.
Senator Thune. Thank you. I hope you guys are very
aggressive on that front.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you all.
The Chairman. Thank you.
Senator Cantwell?
Senator Cantwell. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Welcome to the
witnesses, and thank you for your willingness to serve.
I think I would like to continue with my colleague's
discussion on ag, just as it relates to our State and the fact
that there has been a lot of discussion from the White House on
renegotiating agreements.
In 1996, the export value for Washington State to Canada
and Mexico was $2.6 billion, and that has grown to about $6.8
billion today. I think before that agreement, State apple
exports were very little or nonexistent to Mexico, and now they
are $128 million worth of product.
Since those negotiations have started, there are concerns
about a proposed provision for perishable and seasonal products
that, if adopted, could restrict export of U.S. product to
Canada and Mexico. My colleagues have sent a letter
highlighting this provision and the dangers of it. We have not
heard back from Ambassador Lighthizer yet on this language as
it was put forth in the conversations in Ottawa. So we are very
concerned about that.
We want people to understand that these are very high
stakes for all of us. I think the administration is taking the
attitude that there will be winners and losers, and that is not
the attitude that we in Washington want to see. I am concerned
that for our ag community, this could be a real loss. How will
you ensure that the administration does not jeopardize the
strong trading relationships that our ag community now has?
Mr. Doud. Well, Senator, I do not like to go backwards.
NAFTA and agriculture are critically important to the farm
economy in this country. We had a great conversation in your
office about the importance of this.
I have not been briefed on the details of perishable
product issues and where we are at, but I am a strong advocate
for agriculture, as Senator Roberts indicated. I look forward
to working with you on this in the future.
Senator Cantwell. And that comment means you do not think
we should go backwards.
Mr. Doud. No--we will not go backwards.
Senator Cantwell. Thank you.
Mr. Doud. I would have no intention of it on my watch,
Senator.
Senator Cantwell. Mr. Gerrish, do you support the Export-
Import Bank?
Mr. Gerrish. I do, Senator. I believe the administration
has been appointing nominees for the bank, and I do support it.
Senator Cantwell. Well, just to be clear on that point, the
administration is supporting some nominees who want to destroy
the bank. So we are not for that.
But we do want a functioning bank, and we do think it is
important to have them functioning at all levels of the
financing that they can provide, and we think it is critical to
our export strategy as a Nation, given that so many consumers
live outside the United States. It is the key tool by which we
can make sure that those sales win in the marketplace.
Mr. Kearns, obviously aerospace is also important to the
State of Washington, and it is one of our largest exporting
sectors, with $124 billion a year in commercial aircraft.
If you are confirmed, how will you combat the unfair trade
practices that we are seeing, particularly as the aerospace
market is the big bonanza winner for so many manufacturing jobs
around the globe and we see practices of unfairly subsidizing
aerospace manufacturing?
Mr. Kearns. Thank you, Senator. As you know, that is an
issue that is pending before the ITC now, and I need to be
careful in how I answer. But I think it is fair to say that the
role that the ITC plays in subsidy issues is a very important
one.
We are the ones who will determine whether an industry is
materially injured by unfairly traded imports, and I take that
role very seriously.
Senator Cantwell. Do you think there is something that we
should be doing--I am now asking you just a broader theoretical
question--about expediting some of the decision-making? For
example, the World Trade Organization took a very long time to
finally declare that Airbus had unfairly subsidized, through
launch aid, the aerospace manufacturing of planes in their
country and continues to do so, and yet, to get the economic
relief of that can take decades. The market changes.
Now, we believe in competition and believe in being
aggressive about competition. But do you think we need to
streamline or think of ways to expedite some of these
decisions? Not expedite, but get a timeline where these issues
are discussed in a way that reflects more about what is
happening in the market.
Mr. Kearns. Yes. Of course, in my role at the ITC, I do not
think I would be involved in providing advice on WTO dispute
settlements, for example, but I think there is little question
that the amount of time it has taken to resolve that dispute at
the WTO has been frustrating for just about everyone involved.
Senator Cantwell. Well, Mr. Chairman, I am very convinced
that these three gentlemen represent a huge opportunity for the
United States of America. That is, I have every confidence that
Americans are building and growing and making the best
products. It is really a question about whether we are going to
be well-
prepared to win the battle in trade discussions, win the battle
legally, and win the battle in the world front of making sure
that markets are open to our products.
So I thank them for their willingness to serve.
The Chairman. Thank you, Senator. I appreciate you and your
questions.
Let me just say this. I want to thank everyone for
participating here today and for your attendance. As we have
discussed many times before, this is a critical time to review
and confirm the President's nominees. Our country is relying on
us to get qualified and capable individuals into their
positions so that they can get to work and get some things done
here.
With regard to written questions for the record, I ask that
all members submit them by close of business next Tuesday,
October 10th.
With that, I do not notice anybody else who is here to ask
any questions, so we will adjourn this hearing. Thank you all
for being willing to serve. We really appreciate it.
With that, we will adjourn.
[Whereupon, at 11:49 a.m., the hearing was concluded.]
A P P E N D I X
Additional Material Submitted for the Record
----------
Prepared Statement of Gregory Doud, Nominated to be Chief Agricultural
Negotiator, Office of the United States Trade Representative, With the
Rank of Ambassador, Executive Office of the President
Chairman Hatch, Ranking Member Wyden, members of the Senate Finance
Committee, thank you for welcoming me here today. I am honored to be
considered by this committee as President Trump's nominee to be Chief
Agricultural Negotiator in the Office of the United States Trade
Representative.
I would first like to recognize my wife, Pennye, our children Abby
and Aidan, and my parents, Eldon and JoAnn Doud from Mankato, Kansas. I
am grateful for Pennye's willingness to allow me this opportunity to
serve our country and its farmers and ranchers in this capacity.
Growing up on the farm in Kansas, I have vivid memories of the
economic difficulties that followed the decision to embargo U.S. sales
of wheat to the Soviet Union. After graduate school, I jumped at the
opportunity to work for U.S. Wheat Associates, which immediately
exposed me to the multitude and complexity of challenges that we face
in selling our wheat overseas.
As chief economist of the National Cattlemen's Beef Association, I
spent each day for over 7 years coordinating industry efforts with
USTR, USDA and even our State Department as we slowly rebuilt our beef
exports, from virtually scratch, in the aftermath of the single BSE cow
that stole the Christmas of 2003. While in this role, I also served as
a ``cleared advisor'' and later chairman of the USDA/USTR Animal and
Animal Products Agricultural Trade Advisory Committee (ATAC). This was
during an extremely active period when trade agreements with Australia,
Bahrain, Colombia, CAFTA, South Korea, Morocco, Panama and Peru were
negotiated.
America's farmers and ranchers understand that their future and
their new wealth, as Thomas Jefferson would put it, depends upon the
ability to export the food and fiber they grow to the 95 percent of the
world's population that lives outside the United States. They also
understand, as do I, that these efforts can take years to accomplish
and require a unique combination of strategy and relationship building.
I have spent the vast majority of my career involved in wheat,
soybean and beef export market development efforts in addition to
serving as Senior Professional Staff on the Senate Agriculture
Committee responsible for trade matters. If confirmed, I would consider
it an honor and privilege to join Ambassador Lighthizer and the team at
USTR, which are dedicated to creating new opportunities for U.S.
agriculture and, of course, maintain existing relationships.
As I have discussed with Ambassador Lighthizer, when it comes to
trade agreements, U.S. agriculture plays offense. Our Nation's farmers
and ranchers grow world class products, and should be able to export to
any market in the world and be competitive. If confirmed as Chief
Agriculture Negotiator, I will work to reduce barriers to U.S.
agriculture and secure greater market access for American farmers and
ranchers.
One area where work is needed is Japan. We are at a particularly
critical juncture in terms of our competitiveness for U.S. meat exports
into Japan. Failure to address this situation immediately does not bode
well for our fiercely competitive and rapidly expanding production of
beef, pork and poultry. In fact, this is not only true for Japan but
for all Southeast Asia as well.
Keeping in mind that the evolution of more liberalized trade in
agricultural products takes a great deal of patience, we must also get
started today in planting new trees of market access even though it may
take time before we're able to enjoy some shade from such efforts. In
this category, India certainly comes to mind as a place, which, before
long, could grow to be the most heavily populated nation on the planet.
If confirmed, I look forward to working with Ambassador Lighthizer,
and the stellar team of professionals at USTR to expand markets for
U.S. agriculture. I also look forward to working closely with USDA's
new Undersecretary for Trade to make sure that agriculture always has a
voice when it comes to the nearly $140 billion portfolio that is U.S.
agricultural exports.
I look forward to working with you, Chairman Hatch, Ranking Member
Wyden, and the members of this committee to drive a strategy consistent
with the objectives of Trade Promotion Authority toward reality.
Most importantly, I thank the President for this opportunity and
the committee for considering my nomination. I am happy to answer any
questions.
______
SENATE FINANCE COMMITTEE
STATEMENT OF INFORMATION REQUESTED
OF NOMINEE
A. BIOGRAPHICAL INFORMATION
1. Name (include any former names used): Gregory Fay Doud (Gregg).
2. Position to which nominated: Chief Agricultural Negotiator, Office
of the United States Trade Representative.
3. Date of nomination: June 19, 2017.
4. Address (list current residence, office, and mailing addresses):
5. Date and place of birth: May 6, 1967, Smith Center, KS.
6. Marital status (include maiden name of wife or husband's name):
7. Names and ages of children:
8. Education (list secondary and higher education institutions, dates
attended, degree received, and date degree granted):
Mankato High School, Mankato, KS, 1981-1985, graduated May 1985.
Kansas State University 1985-1989, BS Agriculture (animal science/
pre-vet) received May 1989.
Kansas State University 1989-1991, MS agricultural economics
received July 1991.
9. Employment record (list all jobs held since college, including the
title or description of job, name of employer, location of work, and
dates of employment):
U.S. WHEAT ASSOCIATES, INC., Washington, DC 1991-1997 (export
development organization representing U.S. wheat producers in markets
worldwide).
Assistant director, west coast office, Portland, Oregon (1991 to
1992). Recruited to newly created position to manage commodity trading
programs for visiting foreign trade delegations throughout the region.
Planned schedules, agendas, meetings, and conferences to promote the
sale of hundreds of millions of dollars in annual purchases from
leading wheat producers.
Research and market analyst, DC Headquarters (1992 to 1997). High-
profile position working closely with U.S. Wheat Associates' president
across a broad range of disciplines to advance the U.S. wheat
industry's profitable presence worldwide. Excelled in the areas of
policy development, market analysis, buyer and producer relations,
program/project management, and senior-level liaison affairs.
WORLD PERSPECTIVES, INC., Washington, DC 1997-2000 (international
trade policy and commodity market intelligence wire service for global
trading firms).
Vice president, information services--Member of an exclusive
agricultural market intelligence firm well-known and well-respected as
a leader in industry, economic policy, and trend analysis. Created,
marketed, and led a series of sophisticated market intelligence and
research programs to produce premier industry publications and data
resources. Key industry liaison to worldwide subscriber base including
the U.S. Department of Agriculture, Senators, Congressman, foreign
dignitaries, international trade organizations, and major U.S. and
foreign multinational corporations.
ARCHER DANIELS MIDLAND-AGRI, LLC, Washington, DC 2000-2001 (joint
venture between ADM and USAgri to develop African agricultural
commodity trading and infrastructure).
Vice president--Responsible for developing methods to use U.S.
Government food aid progress as a base for increased U.S. commodity
exports and subsequent investments in agribusiness in Africa and other
developing regions.
AMERICAN SOYBEAN ASSOCIATION, Washington, DC January-
September 2002 (St Louis, Missouri-based export market development
organization representing U.S. soybean producers in markets worldwide).
Director of trade analysis/international marketing--Provided
leadership in the identification, quantification, and communication of
international trade and market barriers that negatively affect U.S.
soybean and product sales and utilization.
MUD SPRINGS GEOGRAPHERS, Washington, DC September-December 2002
(Texas-based agriculture GIS firm).
Consultant--Consulted in business development capacity helping Mud
Springs with introductions and contacts into the agricultural industry.
NATIONAL CATTLEMEN'S BEEF ASSOCIATION, Washington, DC 2003-2011
(the trade association of America's cattle farmers and ranchers).
Chief economist--NCBA's key liaison across a broad spectrum of
audiences regarding financial conditions, industry economics,
marketing, and international trade policy for the beef industry.
UNITED STATES SENATE COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE, NUTRITION, AND
FORESTRY, Washington, DC 2011-2013 (Ranking Member Roberts,
Republican-Kansas; Ranking Member Thad Cochran, Republican-
Mississippi).
Senior professional staff--Managed the livestock, international
trade, food aid, and U.S. Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC)
portfolios as member of the minority staff.
COMMODITY MARKETS COUNCIL, Washington, DC 2013-present (the
leading trade association for commodity futures exchanges and their
industry counterparts).
President--Responsible for leading the advocacy efforts of an
association whose members include some of world's largest agricultural
and energy trading firms regarding regulatory initiatives of the
Commodity Futures Trading Commission.
10. Government experience (list any advisory, consultative, honorary,
or other part-time service or positions with Federal, State, or local
governments, other than those listed above):
None.
11. Business relationships (list all positions held as an officer,
director, trustee, partner, proprietor, agent, representative, or
consultant of any corporation, company, firm, partnership, other
business enterprise, or educational or other institution):
Partnership in a commercial cow-calf operation with a non-family
member located in Beloit, Kansas.
12. Memberships (list all memberships and offices held in
professional, fraternal, scholarly, civic, business, charitable, and
other organizations):
Member--National Cattlemen's Beef Association/Kansas Livestock
Association.
Member--Farm Foundation Roundtable.
Member--Kansas State University Alumni Association.
13. Political affiliations and activities:
a. List all public offices for which you have been a candidate.
None.
b. List all memberships and offices held in and services rendered
to all political parties or election committees during the last 10
years.
None.
c. Itemize all political contributions to any individual, campaign
organization, political party, political action committee, or similar
entity of $50 or more for the past 10 years.
Senator Pat Roberts campaign ($300--February 2015).
Senator Pat Roberts campaign ($500--April 2017).
Steve Schuh campaign--Anne Arundel County (MD) County Executive
($150--June 2017).
14. Honors and awards (list all scholarships, fellowships, honorary
degrees, honorary society memberships, military medals, and any other
special recognitions for outstanding service or achievement):
Kansas State University College of Agriculture, Outstanding Young
Alumni--2012; Brothers of the Century--Alpha Gamma Rho fraternity.
15. Published writings (list the titles, publishers, and dates of all
books, articles, reports, or other published materials you have
written):
None.
16. Speeches (list all formal speeches you have delivered during the
past 5 years which are on topics relevant to the position for which you
have been nominated):
In 2013, I spoke at the Range Beef Cow Symposium in Rapid City,
SD. I do not have a copy of my remarks that focused on my perspective
on how export markets for U.S. beef had evolved.
I have also spoken to the Arizona Cattle Growers' Association in
2015 and 2016. I do not have a copy of my remarks that provided a
general overview of cattle market fundamentals (supply/demand), trade
issues, and Washington, DC ag policy issues.
17. Qualifications (state what, in your opinion, qualifies you to
serve in the position to which you have been nominated):
With the exception of the past 4 years, I have spent essentially
my entire career working on international trade policy and market
access issues involving a number of different agricultural commodities
across a multitude of countries. I have visited approximately 40
countries in my life, including I would estimate about 20 trips to
Mexico. The vast majority of my travels has related to working on
behalf of U.S. wheat and soybean farmers as well as U.S. beef producers
to increase U.S. exports.
I served on the USDA/USTR Animal and Animal Products Ag Trade
Advisory Committee during my tenure as chief economist of the National
Cattlemen's Beef Association, including a stint as chairman of this
group. This experience provided a deeper understanding of a significant
number of trade issues across the entirety of animal agriculture.
During this period, the United States negotiated the Australia, CAFTA,
Colombia, Morocco, Panama, Peru, and South Korean Free Trade
Agreements.
It was an honor to work as a senior professional staff member on
the Senate Agriculture Committee on all matters related to U.S. exports
of agricultural products. During my tenure on the Senate Agriculture
Committee staff I maintained a top secret security clearance, which
allowed be the opportunity to work closely with our agriculture trade
negotiators at USTR and the Trans-Pacific Partnership in particular.
I believe my experience, both in the private sector and in
government, and across the grains, oilseeds, and livestock sectors as
well as my education in animal sciences and agricultural economics
makes me uniquely qualified for this important position.
B. FUTURE EMPLOYMENT RELATIONSHIPS
1. Will you sever all connections with your present employers,
business firms, associations, or organizations if you are confirmed by
the Senate? If not, provide details.
Connection /employment with my current employer, the Commodity
Markets Council, will be severed upon confirmation.
I will maintain ownership in the commercial cow-calf (silent)
partnership per the agreement outlined by the White House ethics office
(retaining passive income on a per/head of cattle marketed annually
basis only.)
I would like to maintain my membership in the Kansas State
University Alumni Association if possible.
Per Farm Foundation Roundtable member requirements, upon
confirmation, my membership in the Farm Foundation Roundtable will be
suspended until I am no longer employed by the U.S. Government.
All other memberships will end upon expiration.
2. Do you have any plans, commitments, or agreements to pursue
outside employment, with or without compensation, during your service
with the government? If so, provide details.
No.
3. Has any person or entity made a commitment or agreement to employ
your services in any capacity after you leave government service? If
so, provide details.
No.
4. If you are confirmed by the Senate, do you expect to serve out
your full term or until the next presidential election, whichever is
applicable? If not, explain.
Yes.
C. POTENTIAL CONFLICTS OF INTEREST
1. Indicate any investments, obligations, liabilities, or other
relationships which could involve potential conflicts of interest in
the position to which you have been nominated.
I have none.
2. Describe any business relationship, dealing, or financial
transaction which you have had during the last 10 years, whether for
yourself, on behalf of a client, or acting as an agent, that could in
any way constitute or result in a possible conflict of interest in the
position to which you have been nominated.
None of my personal business dealings or business relationships
have had anything to do with the U.S. Government.
3. Describe any activity during the past 10 years in which you have
engaged for the purpose of directly or indirectly influencing the
passage, defeat, or modification of any legislation or affecting the
administration and execution of law or public policy. Activities
performed as an employee of the Federal Government need not be listed.
-- Indirectly involved in the Country-of-Origin Labeling (COOL)
debate 2007-2011.
-- Indirectly involved in the USDA ``GIPSA Rule'' debate 2009-2011.
-- Indirectly involved in passage of free trade agreements 2007-
2011.
-- Indirectly involved in CFTC-related issues including the CFTC
reauthorization bill and issues covering deliverable supply estimates
and swap dealer de minimis and position limits for commodity
derivatives trading 2013-present.
4. Explain how you will resolve any potential conflict of interest,
including any that may be disclosed by your responses to the above
items.
I have not been a registered lobbyist during any time in the past
10 years. During the vast majority of my career in Washington, DC my
role has been as an economist and commodity analyst with a global
scope. The livestock-related matters listed above are settled and also
outside the scope of the Chief Agricultural Negotiator position. My
role as Chief Agricultural Negotiator at USTR will have no application
to issues related to commodity derivatives market regulation or law. I
do not see any current or potential conflict of interest with anything
I have done over the course of my career.
5. Two copies of written opinions should be provided directly to the
committee by the designate agency ethics officer of the agency to which
you have been nominated and by the Office of Government Ethics
concerning potential conflicts of interest or any legal impediments to
your serving in this position.
Submitted to USTR.
6. The following information is to be provided only by nominees to
the positions of United States Trade Representative and Deputy United
States Trade Representative:
Have you ever represented, advised, or otherwise aided a foreign
government or a foreign political organization with respect to any
international trade matter? If so, provide the name of the foreign
entity, a description of the work performed (including any work you
supervised), the time frame of the work (e.g., March to December 1995),
and the number of hours spent on the representation.
No.
D. LEGAL AND OTHER MATTERS
1. Have you ever been the subject of a complaint or been
investigated, disciplined, or otherwise cited for a breach of ethics
for unprofessional conduct before any court, administrative agency,
professional association, disciplinary committee, or other professional
group? If so, provide details.
No.
2. Have you ever been investigated, arrested, charged, or held by any
Federal, State, or other law enforcement authority for a violation of
any Federal, State, county, or municipal law, regulation, or ordinance,
other than a minor traffic offense? If so, provide details.
No.
3. Have you ever been involved as a party in interest in any
administrative agency proceeding or civil litigation? If so, provide
details.
No.
4. Have you ever been convicted (including pleas of guilty or nolo
contendere) of any criminal violation other than a minor traffic
offense? If so, provide details.
No.
5. Please advise the committee of any additional information,
favorable or unfavorable, which you feel should be considered in
connection with your nomination.
I am thankful to have received significant support from the
Washington, DC agricultural (trade association) community in favor of
my nomination.
E. TESTIFYING BEFORE CONGRESS
1. If you are confirmed by the Senate, are you willing to appear and
testify before any duly constituted committee of the Congress on such
occasions as you may be reasonably requested to do so?
Yes.
2. If you are confirmed by the Senate, are you willing to provide
such information as is requested by such committees?
Yes.
______
Questions Submitted for the Record to Gregory Doud
Questions Submitted by Hon. Orrin G. Hatch
Question. Canada and Mexico are our first and third largest
agricultural export markets, and American farmers have proven to be
highly successful in competing in those marketplaces.
Do you agree that the Canadian and Mexican markets are critical for
supporting the livelihoods of millions of farmers and related workers,
and if so, how important is the North American Free Trade Agreement to
preserving those farm jobs?
Answer. Canada and Mexico are very important markets for U.S.
agriculture, and the access we have to those markets under the NAFTA is
a key reason we are by far the largest supplier of agricultural
products to each, but we can do better under a new NAFTA. If confirmed,
I am committed to working to further expand agricultural exports to
Canada and Mexico, including through NAFTA renegotiation.
Question. As in other areas of innovation, the United States leads
the world in developing and utilizing agricultural technology. This
helps U.S. farmers and farmers around the globe increase yield and feed
a growing world. Unfortunately, U.S. agricultural products are often
blocked by other countries, not for scientific reasons, but rather to
restrict trade from American farmers.
How do you plan to prevent our trading partners from blocking
American agriculture exports as U.S. technology continues to advance?
Answer. Ensuring that American farmers have access to innovative
agricultural technologies to address pest, disease, and other
production challenges is critically important to feeding a growing
world. Unjustified regulatory burdens and needless delays imposed by
authorities in our key markets, such as China and the EU, have
prevented the commercialization and use of certain innovative
technologies, particularly biotechnology, in the last two decades.
Currently, many countries are considering policy approaches to new
innovative breeding tools, such as gene editing. If confirmed, I will
use all tools at my disposal, including enforcement tools, to address
not only the current regulatory barriers preventing the
commercialization of biotech products, but also work to ensure that
American farmers have access to innovative new breeding tools in the
future.
______
Questions Submitted by Hon. Pat Roberts
Question. Our farmers and ranchers depend on strong trade
relationships around the world. Expanding market access and ensuring
that our producers remain competitive is critical to our economy. USTR
and USDA have a history of working hand in hand to make sure that U.S.
agriculture has a seat at the trade table.
As the Chief Agricultural Negotiator for the United States, how
will you work with other agencies, specifically USDA, to make sure that
agriculture is a top priority?
Answer. Food and agricultural exports provide critical support to
farm income, and the food processing and beverage manufacturing
industries are a top source for manufacturing jobs in the United
States. USTR works closely with trade and technical experts at USDA,
and other agencies, to resolve the full range of agricultural trade
issues. If confirmed, I intend to maintain and strengthen that
relationship and will work closely with USDA to expand agricultural
exports as a top priority for the United States.
Question. The administration has placed much of the focus on
international trade on non-agricultural products like steel.
Agricultural exports generated an export value of $133 billion in 2015.
Export markets are critical to the agriculture industry.
How will you ensure that the value of agricultural trade is
understood and prioritized by the administration?
Answer. I agree that agriculture is a critically important part of
our trade agenda, and I believe that the President agrees, even if
there is a large and justified emphasis on manufacturing trade. If
confirmed, I will work to make sure an ambitious outcome for
agriculture will be a central objective in any negotiation we
undertake. I am committed to consulting closely with U.S. agricultural
stakeholders and members of Congress to ensure that the interests of
farmers and ranchers are fully considered in our decisions on
international trade issues.
Question. In addition, as the administration pursues potential
trade remedies, how will you work with other agencies and the White
House to make sure that consequences that could negatively impact
agriculture, such as retaliation, are strongly considered?
Answer. If confirmed, I will work closely with USDA and other
agencies to ensure that U.S. trade policy decisions give full
consideration to the implications for agricultural exports.
Question. China is one of the United States' top agricultural
markets. However, Kansas wheat farmers championed the recent cases
announced by USTR on Chinese subsidies and tariff rate quotas (TRQs),
as wheat growers are especially impacted by the seeming failure of
China to adhere to their commitments in the WTO. Kansas ranks as the
third highest U.S. State exporter of beef to the global market. Since
2003, the U.S. beef industry had tried to regain access into China, and
I was very pleased that China recently lifted its ban on U.S. beef.
However, there is still work needed in monitoring this agreement and
working to promote and grow this complex and sensitive trading
relationship. This access to the Chinese market is critical for my
cattlemen back home.
These are just two of the challenges we face in one of our most
important export markets. A strong trade policy is clearly about more
than free trade agreements. How will you work with other countries to
ensure that barriers to trade are reduced and eliminated?
Answer. I fully understand the importance of enhancing market
access around the world for farmers and ranchers in Kansas and all
other States. U.S. food and agricultural exports face a number of
unwarranted barriers and trade distortive policies in other countries,
including China. Ensuring that our trading partners meet their
international trade obligations, especially those of the World Trade
Organization, is a core foundation for fairer and freer trade. If
confirmed, I will work with Ambassador Lighthizer for the expansion of
U.S. agricultural exports through negotiations that create enhanced
export opportunities for our farmers and ranchers. Where countries fail
to do so, we will work with the administration and congressional
colleagues to aggressively utilize all available tools in the WTO,
options under U.S. law, bilateral engagement, and other mechanisms.
Question. Agricultural trade is essential to American farmers and
ranchers, but expanding market access for our products through new
trade agreements is just one piece of the puzzle. The enforcement of
existing agreements will ensure that our trading partners are playing
by the rules they have agreed to, and that our producers have a level
playing field.
Whether dealing with steel in China, dairy products in Canada, or
other products, if confirmed, how will you approach enforcement of our
agreements with other countries?
Answer. If confirmed, I am committed to supporting the Trump
administration's strong enforcement focus and using the full range of
U.S. trade policy and enforcement tools, including WTO dispute
settlement, and U.S. legal options to benefit U.S. agriculture. USTR
and USDA work hard every day to resolve unfair trade barriers to U.S.
agricultural exports, and many of those barriers are resolved because
of those efforts. USTR is also currently pursuing multiple WTO disputes
challenging agricultural trade barriers. For example, the
administration has pushed forward with a WTO panel to examine the
first-ever challenge to China's agricultural domestic support. USTR has
also successfully established a WTO panel to examine China's TRQ
administration for corn, wheat and rice. These enforcement efforts are
a critical mechanism to ensure that our trading partners respect WTO
rules and U.S. farmers and ranchers are able to compete on a level
playing field with all WTO member countries.
______
Question Submitted by Hon. Johnny Isakson
Question. Agriculture exports are critically important to our
economy and China represents an important market for many U.S.
agricultural products. Cotton is a commodity that is dependent on
exports, and over 90 percent of U.S. cotton is ultimately exported as
either raw cotton, yarn, fabric, or apparel.
I am sure you are aware of the ongoing relationship between the
U.S. cotton industry and China. Over the last 13 years, U.S. cotton
exports to China have averaged 4.6 million bales, which represents over
30 percent of U.S. exports and 42 percent of China's cotton imports.
China's cotton imports can vary greatly due to their domestic policies
and import controls. In many years, China's WTO required tariff rate
quota has been insufficient relative to their domestic cotton
production and demand in their textile industry.
As you know, our cotton producers are struggling financially due to
high production costs and low prices for both cotton lint and seed.
Growing demand for U.S. cotton and addressing the policy limitations on
exports can help address some of these challenging economic conditions.
Can I have your commitment to work with Ambassador Lighthizer and
others in the administration to pursue an increase in China's cotton
imports by adjusting the tariff rate quota level?
Answer. I understand the importance of this issue to U.S. cotton
producers. I am aware that, in past years, U.S. producers exported
large amounts of cotton to China at a low duty rate, and that more
recently China's imports have been limited to the amount in its WTO
tariff-rate quota. If confirmed, I will undertake efforts, along with
Ambassador Lighthizer and others in the administration, to pursue an
increase in China's cotton imports at low tariff levels.
______
Questions Submitted by Hon. Patrick J. Toomey
Question. As you know, the U.S. Commerce Department announced new
suspension agreements earlier this year to further restrict the amount
of sugar imported from Mexico. These agreements are a terrible deal for
American consumers and food manufacturers and only benefit several
hand-picked sugar companies. Despite higher prices for Mexican sugar,
the United States continues to be a net importer of sugar because
domestic growers and refiners cannot produce enough sugar to satisfy
demand. Although the United States imports roughly 1.5 million tons of
sugar each year, a shortfall still exists, and our country must
increase the amount of sugar imported from other countries.
Do you acknowledge that the United States must increase sugar
imports from other countries to meet the demands of American consumers
and food manufacturers? If confirmed, will you seek provisions in NAFTA
to ensure that American food manufacturers have adequate access to
foreign sugar? Will you consider increasing Canada's tariff-rate quota
for sugar, which is similar to a proposal that was included in the
Trans-Pacific Partnership?
Answer. I understand your concerns about access to adequate sugar
supplies in the American market. As you are aware, authority over sugar
imports is divided between USTR and the U.S. Department of Agriculture
(USDA). If confirmed, I commit to work closely with you, other members
of Congress, USDA, and stakeholders--including sugar growers, refiners
and confectionary producers--to ensure that any concerns about the
availability of sugar are addressed in the best way possible.
Question. The U.S.-Korea Free Trade Agreement (KORUS) has opened
new export opportunities for farmers and food processors in
Pennsylvania. South Korea is the sixth largest agricultural market for
Pennsylvania, purchasing $57 million in agriculture exports in 2016,
including chocolate and cocoa products, dairy, and pork to name just a
few. KORUS also received wide bipartisan support when Congress approved
the agreement in 2012.
I have heard from many Pennsylvania farmers, who are concerned
about the United States withdrawing from KORUS and losing market
opportunities to sell their products abroad.
If confirmed, what steps will you take to ensure that the United
States does not withdraw from KORUS? What modifications to the
agreement do you see as realistic to ensure that withdrawal does not
occur?
Answer. I know that South Korea is a very important market for U.S.
farmers and ranchers. I understand that USTR has held two special
sessions of the Joint Committee under KORUS to try to address
outstanding implementation-related concerns, to consider possible
amendments and modifications, and to address the trade imbalance. If
confirmed, I look forward to consulting and working with you and your
colleagues on future engagement with Korea and to bring quick
resolution to these areas.
______
Questions Submitted by Hon. Ron Wyden
Question. This administration, including the Office of the U.S.
Trade Representative, has fallen short on transparency and
consultations with Congress, stakeholders, and the public. Getting more
transparency in our trade policy has been a top priority for me. We
won't end up with trade deals that benefit all Americans if we can't
talk about proposals at town halls. That is why I insisted on new
requirements to raise the bar when it comes to transparency.
If confirmed, do you commit to consulting closely with Congress and
follow the letter and spirit of all transparency and consultations
requirements established by the Trade Promotion Authority bill Congress
passed in 2015 (including the Guidelines on Transparency and Public
Engagement issued by USTR in October 2015) and the enforcement bill
passed in 2016?
Answer. If confirmed, I commit to following the consultation
requirements required by law and to follow the Guidelines on
Transparency and Public Engagement issued by USTR in October 2015.
Question. The European Union has aggressively pursued the misuse of
geographical indications for food products in third countries to block
competition from the United States. This policy inappropriately covers
generic terms for products that the United States would otherwise
competitively export to those products. Currently, discussions between
the EU and Mexico and Japan pose a significant threat to U.S.
producers.
What will you do to counter EU efforts in those countries, as well
as other international markets?
Answer. I understand that the United States and the EU have long-
standing differences over policies regarding geographical indications
(GIs). I understand that these long-standing differences include what
bearing an international standard has on a determination of whether a
food name is a common name and thus not protectable as a GI. If
confirmed, I will continue to raise strong concerns regarding the
impact of the EU's GI policies on market access for U.S. owners of
trademarks and U.S. producers and traders using common food names.
Question. The President has suggested from time to time that the
United States should withdraw from NAFTA and, more recently, the U.S.-
Korea trade agreement. Talks are underway with respect to both
agreements, but have not concluded.
What impact would withdrawal from these trade agreements have on
American exporters of agricultural products?
Answer. NAFTA and the U.S.-Korea trade agreement remain important
to American agriculture. The impact of withdrawing from these
agreements is difficult to ascertain. If confirmed, I commit to work
closely with Congress and stakeholders, including agriculture
stakeholders to improve upon these agreements and open new markets for
American agriculture.
Question. Several of Canada's provinces maintain an array of
discriminatory restrictions on the sale and distribution of imported
wine, which directly impact producers in Oregon. The last
administration requested consultations at the World Trade Organization
related to some of those restrictions, and USTR recently updated that
request. I have been disappointed in the delay in moving this dispute
forward.
If confirmed, do you commit to aggressively pursuing these
practices, both through dispute settlement, as well as in the NAFTA
renegotiation discussions?
Answer. I understand the U.S. wine industry has serious concerns
with policies restricting sales of U.S. wine in Canada. The Trump
administration recently requested WTO dispute consultations on British
Columbia's revised regulations on retail sale of wine in grocery
stores. If confirmed, I will work to determine the most effective path
forward to address any regulations that may be harming our wine
exports.
Question. How important in your view is it to U.S. farmers that WTO
members comply with their obligations under the agreements and how does
the current system of dispute settlement contribute to compliance?
Answer. The Trump administration is committed to focusing on strong
enforcement and using the full range of U.S. trade policy and
enforcement tools, including WTO dispute settlement, to benefit U.S.
agriculture. If confirmed, I will fully support that enforcement focus.
USTR and USDA work hard every day to resolve unfair trade barriers to
U.S. agricultural exports, and many of those barriers are resolved
because of those efforts. USTR is also currently pursuing multiple WTO
disputes challenging agricultural trade barriers. These enforcement
efforts are to ensure that our trading partners respect WTO rules and
U.S. farmers and ranchers are able to compete on a level playing field
with all WTO member countries.
______
Questions Submitted by Hon. Debbie Stabenow
Question. Michigan is the second most agriculturally diverse State,
producing over 300 different kinds of commodities. In negotiations with
our trading partners, it's often the case that the interests of one
agricultural commodity are pitted against the needs of another.
If you are confirmed, how will you balance the interests of all
crops, including specialty crops? How will you prioritize the trade
interests of different commodities?
Answer. If confirmed, I will work to expand exports of all types of
agricultural products from all regions of the United States.
Question. In May, Chairman Roberts and I wrote a letter to
Secretary Perdue and Ambassador Lighthizer urging them to engage with
their counterparts in Canada about Canada's National Ingredient
Strategy for dairy, which is displacing U.S. exports of ultra-filtered
milk. I remain concerned about this policy change and the further
impact it could have on world prices and U.S. producers.
If you are confirmed, will you commit to work with USDA to resolve
these concerns about Canada's changes to their dairy pricing policies?
Will you commit to keeping my staff updated about the actions USTR is
taking to address this issue?
Answer. I know these are critical issues for our dairy farmers and
I will work with members of Congress, USDA, and the U.S. dairy industry
to address these issues if confirmed.
Question. As we discussed previously, the United States was a net
exporter of cherries until 2002, but a flood of cheap imports from
Turkey, Poland, and Hungary in recent years is now threatening to put
U.S. producers out of business.
If confirmed, will you commit to working with me and meeting with
representatives of Michigan's cherry industry to examine all options to
address these issues?
Answer. If confirmed, I look forward to working with you, cherry
producers, and industry representatives on this issue.
Question. Michigan asparagus growers have been struggling with
dumping from Mexico and Peru for several years. Michigan ranks #2 in
asparagus production, but imports of fresh asparagus tripled between
1990 and 2010, while acres of asparagus planted in Michigan shrank by
more than half over the same period.
If confirmed, will you commit to working with me and meeting with
representatives of Michigan's asparagus industry to examine all options
to address this issue?
Answer. If confirmed, I will look into this matter and I look
forward to working with you to ensure that asparagus producers in
Michigan have the ability to compete on a level playing field in both
the domestic and international marketplace.
______
Questions Submitted by Hon. Maria Cantwell
Question. In Washington State, the dairy industry contributes more
than $5 billion a year in combined total economic activity and is
responsible for more than 18,000 jobs. Our largest cooperative in the
State has almost 500 farmer member owners and is the 2nd largest
private employer in my State.
They understand--like so many Washington companies do--the
importance of global markets since more than 40 percent of their
farmers' milk is exported to over 20 countries around the world. Those
sales are now being put at risk by those Canadian pricing regulations--
called Class 7--that were implemented earlier this year.
Washington's dairy farmers and the manufacturing workers that turn
their milk into finished products exported around the world compete on
a commercial basis on global markets; they cannot risk having that
upended by this new Canadian government policy that allows its high-
price and highly sheltered industry to offload commodity products onto
those markets at fire-sale prices.
This program adds insult to injury since our highly competitive
dairy sector can't ship its products north of the border due to
Canada's 200-300% tariffs on most dairy products.
What steps will the administration take to deal with both the
tariff barriers and nontariff problems distorting the U.S./Canadian
dairy trade?
Answer. I understand Canada maintains strict limits on imports of
dairy products and know it is important to obtain new access to the
Canadian market through NAFTA renegotiation. Additionally, I understand
that Class 7 pricing is a critical issue for our dairy farmers and, if
confirmed, I will work to address this issue. If confirmed, I will
consult with U.S. industry representatives and members of Congress,
consistent with Trade Promotion Authority, on the United States'
approach to the ongoing NAFTA negotiations.
______
Questions Submitted by Hon. Robert P. Casey
Question. Mr. Doud, I am very concerned about potential changes to
how antidumping and countervailing duties are assessed which could have
a significant impact on Pennsylvania producers. Further I am troubled
there was not significant consultation with congressional stakeholders
prior to proposing this change.
Will you commit to thorough consultation with Congress prior to
tabling and closing measures pertaining to agriculture in any trade
negotiation?
Answer. If confirmed, I will comply with the Bipartisan
Congressional Trade Priorities and Accountability Act of 2015 (TPA) to
consult with Congress on all trade negotiations pertaining to
agriculture.
Question. Mr. Doud, Please discuss how you will engage outside
stakeholders, Federal agencies and Congress should an issue arise in a
trade negotiation, bilateral or multilateral engagement that may
benefit some commodity stakeholders but harm others.
Answer. To negotiate any agreement one has to have a full and
detailed understanding of the issue and the interests of all
stakeholders--outside stakeholders, U.S. Federal agencies and of course
Congress. As a former cleared advisor and Senior Professional Staff
Member in the Senate, I have seen firsthand the importance of
consultations with Congress and stakeholders. I fully intend to have
robust consultations with all stakeholders, including USTR's trade
advisors, other agencies and Congress, in developing positions for
trade negotiations. My job is to expand exports for all food and
agricultural products.
Question. Mr. Doud, trade is critically important to the
agricultural economy. Canada and Mexico are major export markets for
the U.S. diary sector, which is a significant industry in my State. I
am concerned changes in Canadian policies are displacing U.S. exports.
I am equally concerned about maintaining U.S. market access to Mexico.
How will you ensure that Canada abides by the terms of NAFTA with
respect to dairy trade?
What will you do to ensure that U.S. dairy producers continue to
have strong access to the Mexican market?
Do you view expanded dairy access as a priority in the NAFTA
renegotiation?
Please discuss how you intend to engage with the Canadians on
expanded dairy access?
Answer. I understand Canada maintains strict limits on imports of
dairy products and know it is important to obtain new access to the
Canadian market through NAFTA renegotiation. The administration is
committed to maintaining the markets that our agricultural sectors
have, including to Mexico, and creating opportunities to expand
exports. If confirmed, I will consult with U.S. industry and members of
Congress, consistent with Trade Promotion Authority, on the United
States' approach to the on-going NAFTA negotiations.
______
Prepared Statement of Jeffrey Gerrish, Nominated to be Deputy United
States Trade Representative for Asia, Europe, the Middle East, and
Industrial Competitiveness, With the Rank of Ambassador, Executive
Office of the President
Chairman Hatch, Ranking Member Wyden, and distinguished members of
the Senate Finance Committee, it is a great honor for me to appear
before you today. I feel both privileged and humbled to have been
recommended by Ambassador Lighthizer and nominated by President Trump
to serve as Deputy United States Trade Representative.
I would like to take a moment first to thank my wife Kelly and our
three children Jacob, Kate, and Grace. They have been a constant source
of inspiration, strength, and support for me throughout my career, and
I would not be where I am today without them. I would also like to
thank the incredible mentors and role models I have had over the years,
including Ambassador Lighthizer and my friend and former partner, John
Mangan, who is here with us today. I have been blessed with the
opportunity to work with and learn from many immensely talented
individuals, and I am truly grateful for that.
In addition, I would like to express my thanks to the members and
staff that I have been able to visit with over the past couple of
months. If confirmed, I look forward to working with you on the
critical trade issues facing our great country.
To give you a little background about me, I grew up in a city by
the name of Troy in upstate New York. Troy used to be a manufacturing
town, with steel and then textiles the primary goods produced there.
The manufacturing is gone now and the city has faced difficult times,
but the people of Troy remain as fundamentally decent, down-to-earth,
and hard working as any you will find. I was taught the value of a
strong work ethic from an early age by my parents and grandparents and
others in my hometown, and that virtue has remained with me and served
me well in every single thing I have done.
For almost 20 years, I have practiced international trade law. Over
that time, I have worked extensively on behalf of U.S. manufacturers in
seeking to combat unfair trade in this market, the massive subsidies
and trade distorting industrial policies employed by countries around
the world, and the challenge of global overcapacity facing a number of
industries. I have fought for strong enforcement of our trade laws and
to preserve U.S. policies at the World Trade Organization and other
international bodies. My work has also entailed assisting American
companies that have been improperly denied access to other markets
around the world. Through my work, I know first-hand the problems that
unfair trade can cause but also the opportunities that trade can
present for U.S. companies.
My experience has clearly demonstrated to me that we need a trade
policy that puts America first. This does not mean closing ourselves
off from the rest of the world. It simply means putting American
manufacturers, workers, farmers, ranchers, and service providers first
in everything we do in the trade arena. It means negotiating stronger
and more effective trade agreements and ensuring that the trade
agreements we have are properly enforced and applied in the manner
originally intended. We must aggressively and effectively apply our
trade laws to counteract unfair trade practices and work with like-
minded trading partners to defend the use of such trade laws and to
address the enormous overcapacity problem plaguing our steel, aluminum,
and other industries. For our creators and innovators, it means
promoting greater intellectual property protection and enforcement
among our trading partners. It is absolutely critical that we protect
American companies' intellectual property, which is one of our greatest
assets.
If confirmed, I hope to work with this committee, others in
Congress, those in the administration, and all interested parties to
craft and implement a trade policy that increases trade and spurs
economic growth but does so in a way that promotes fair and reciprocal
trade that benefits all segments of our economy. The trade issues
confronting the United States are numerous and daunting, and I would
welcome the opportunity to work with you in tackling them. If
confirmed, I promise you that I will bring my strong international
trade experience to bear and will work tirelessly to achieve the best
possible results for your constituents and the country.
Thank you for your consideration, and I would be happy to answer
any questions.
______
SENATE FINANCE COMMITTEE
STATEMENT OF INFORMATION REQUESTED
OF NOMINEE
A. BIOGRAPHICAL INFORMATION
1. Name (include any former names used): Jeffrey David Gerrish.
2. Position to which nominated: Deputy United States Trade
Representative.
3. Date of nomination: June 15, 2017.
4. Address (list current residence, office, and mailing addresses):
5. Date and place of birth: June 4, 1969 in Troy, New York.
6. Marital status (include maiden name of wife or husband's name):
7. Names and ages of children:
8. Education (list secondary and higher education institutions, dates
attended, degree received, and date degree granted):
Boston University, September 1987 to May 1989.
State University of New York at Albany, September 1989 to May
1991, BA (May 1991).
Duke University School of Law, August 1991 to May 1994, JD (May
1994).
9. Employment record (list all jobs held since college, including the
title or description of job, name of employer, location of work, and
dates of employment):
Maynard, O'Connor, and Smith, scheduling assistant, Albany, NY,
Summer 1991.
Law Office of Marie Sykes, summer associate, Durham, NC, Summer
1992.
U.S. Small Business Administration, legal intern, Washington, DC,
Summer 1993.
Law Office of Robert Seidel, associate, Durham, NC, July 1994 to
January 1995.
Tobin and Dempf, associate, Albany, NY, January 1995 to March
1998.
Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher, and Flom LLP, associate, March 1998
to August 1999.
Arnold and Porter, associate, August 1999 to April 2000.
Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher, and Flom LLP, associate, April 2000
to May 2004.
Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher, and Flom LLP, counsel, May 2004 to
April 2007.
Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher, and Flom LLP, partner, April 2007
to present.
10. Government experience (list any advisory, consultative, honorary,
or other part-time service or positions with Federal, State, or local
governments, other than those listed above):
Member of the Rules Advisory Committee for the U.S. Court of
International Trade, 2008 to present.
11. Business relationships (list all positions held as an officer,
director, trustee, partner, proprietor, agent, representative, or
consultant of any corporation, company, firm, partnership, other
business enterprise, or educational or other institution):
Partner, Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher, and Flom LLP.
12. Memberships (list all memberships and offices held in
professional, fraternal, scholarly, civic, business, charitable, and
other organizations):
Member of Mount Vernon Country Club.
Member of the Rules Advisory Committee for the U.S. Court of
International Trade.
Board member and co-chair of the International Trade Committee for
the Customs and International Trade Bar Association.
Member of the District of Columbia, New York, and North Carolina
bars.
13. Political affiliations and activities:
a. List all public offices for which you have been a candidate.
None.
b. List all memberships and offices held in and services rendered
to all political parties or election committees during the last 10
years.
None.
c. Itemize all political contributions to any individual, campaign
organization, political party, political action committee, or similar
entity of $50 or more for the past 10 years.
None.
14. Honors and awards (list all scholarships, fellowships, honorary
degrees, honorary society memberships, military medals, and any other
special recognitions for outstanding service or achievement):
Phi Beta Kappa.
United States Law Week Award.
Repeatedly selected for inclusion in The Best Lawyers in America.
15. Published writings (list the titles, publishers, and dates of all
books, articles, reports, or other published materials you have
written):
``U.S. Court of International Trade Overview: Non-Market Economy
Cases in 2012,'' Georgetown Journal of International Law, vol. 45, no.
1, 2013.
``Protecting the Right to Judicial Review in Trade Remedy Cases:
Preliminary Injunctions and the Impact of Recent Court Decisions,''
Tulane Journal of International and Comparative Law, vol. 19, no. 2,
2011.
``International Trade,'' The International Lawyer, vol. 38, no. 2,
2004.
``OFAC and BIS Implement Additional Amendments in Support of Cuba
Policy Shift,'' Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher, and Flom LLP client
mailing, October 28, 2016.
``U.S. Implements Regulation Changes for Encryption Products,
Software, and Technology,'' Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher, and Flom LLP
client mailing, September 29, 2016.
``Interim Regulations Issued on Investigations of Evasion of Anti-
Dumping and Countervailing Duties,'' Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher, and
Flom LLP client mailing, September 21, 2016.
``Insights Conversations: Developments in U.S. Export Controls,''
Westlaw Journal Government Contract, May 23, 2016.
``U.S. Further Eases Sanctions Ahead of President's Historic Trip
to Cuba,'' Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher, and Flom LLP client mailing,
March 17, 2016.
``OFAC and BIS Ease Cuba Restrictions With New Amendments,''
Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher, and Flom LLP client mailing, February 5,
2016.
`` `Implementation Day': Key Aspects of U.S. and EU Implementation
of Iran Sanctions Relief,'' Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher, and Flom LLP
client mailing, January 28, 2016.
``Insights Conversations: Developments in U.S. Export Controls,''
Skadden's 2016 Insights--Regulatory Developments, January 2016.
``Key Takeaways: The Latest Developments in U.S. Export Controls--
Export Control Reform and Compliance Strategies,'' Skadden, Arps,
Slate, Meagher, and Flom LLP client mailing, November 11, 2015.
``OFAC and BIS Further Ease Cuba Restrictions,'' Skadden, Arps,
Slate, Meagher, and Flom LLP client mailing, September 29, 2015.
``Agencies Propose Expanding U.S. Export Controls on Cameras,
Night Vision Equipment, and Sensing Technology,'' Skadden, Arps, Slate,
Meagher, and Flom LLP client mailing, May 21, 2015.
``What Every General Counsel Needs to Know to Comply With New BEA
Reporting Requirements,'' Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher, and Flom LLP
client mailing, April 13, 2015.
``Department of Energy Announces Significant Changes to the U.S.
Controls on Exports of Unclassified Nuclear Technology and
Assistance,'' Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher, and Flom LLP client
mailing, March 17, 2015.
``New Reporting Requirements Planned for U.S. Financial Services
Providers Doing Business With Non-U.S. Persons,'' Skadden, Arps, Slate,
Meagher, and Flom LLP client mailing, March 2, 2015.
``OFAC and BIS Implement Changes in Cuba Policy,'' Skadden, Arps,
Slate, Meagher, and Flom LLP client mailing, January 20, 2015.
``Important but Frequently Overlooked Reporting Requirements for
Inbound and Outbound Direct Investment Involving U.S. Entities,''
Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher, and Flom LLP client mailing, January 16,
2015.
``Expansion of Military End-Use Controls Creates Potential
Pitfalls for Exporters,'' Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher, and Flom LLP
client mailing, November 13, 2014.
``Federal Circuit Decision Underscores the Importance of Customs
Compliance for All Parties to an Import Transaction,'' Skadden, Arps,
Slate, Meagher, and Flom LLP client mailing, September 23, 2014.
``U.S. Imposes New Licensing Requirements on Exports to Russia of
Oil and Gas Equipment and `Dual-Use' Items,'' Skadden, Arps, Slate,
Meagher, and Flom LLP client mailing, August 15, 2014.
``Latest U.S. Export Control Reforms Impact Companies in the
Military Electronics Industry,'' Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher, and
Flom LLP client mailing, July 10, 2014.
``U.S. Government Announces Reforms to Space and Satellite Systems
Export Controls,'' Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher, and Flom LLP client
mailing, May 13, 2014.
``An Update on Economic Sanctions Related to Events in Ukraine,''
Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher, and Flom LLP client mailing, May 7,
2014.
``U.S. Government Announces Ban on High-Technology Exports to
Russia and Crimea,'' Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher, and Flom LLP client
mailing, May 2, 2014.
``U.S. Government Halts Licensing for Key Exports to Russia in
Response to Events in Ukraine,'' Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher, and
Flom LLP client mailing, April 4, 2014.
``Negotiations for New International Services Trade Agreement
Offer Business Opportunities,'' Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher, and Flom
LLP client mailing, February 4, 2013.
``U.S. Challenges China's Automobile and Auto Parts Export
Policies at the WTO,'' Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher, and Flom LLP
client mailing, October 23, 2012.
``How H.R. 1905 Further Hobbles Business With Iran,'' Law360,
August 15, 2012.
``New Sanctions Against Iran: President Obama Signs the Iran
Threat Reduction and Syria Human Rights Act of 2012,'' Skadden, Arps,
Slate, Meagher, and Flom LLP client mailing, August 14, 2012.
``U.S. Conditionally Suspends Two Key Economic Sanctions Against
Burma,'' Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher, and Flom LLP client mailing,
July 17, 2012.
``Takeaways From United Technologies' $75M Settlement,'' Law360,
July 10, 2012.
``United Technologies Corporation and Subsidiaries Agree to a $75
Million-Plus Settlement of Export Control Violations,'' Skadden, Arps,
Slate, Meagher, and Flom LLP client mailing, July 5, 2012.
``Export Control Reform Initiative: Transition Rules,'' Skadden,
Arps, Slate, Meagher, and Flom LLP client mailing, June 28, 2012.
``New Sanctions Against Iran: President Obama Signs the
Comprehensive Iran Sanctions, Accountability, and Divestment Act of
2010, and the United Nations and the European Union Announce New
Sanctions Against Iran,'' Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher, and Flom LLP
client mailing, July 8, 2010.
``Proposed Rule to Establish Export License Exception for Intra-
Company Transfers,'' Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher, and Flom LLP client
mailing, October 10, 2008.
16. Speeches (list all formal speeches you have delivered during the
past 5 years which are on topics relevant to the position for which you
have been nominated):
None.
17. Qualifications (state what, in your opinion, qualifies you to
serve in the position to which you have been nominated):
I have practiced international trade law for approximately 19
years and have extensive experience in and knowledge of many of the
areas within the responsibility of the U.S. Trade Representative's
Office.
B. FUTURE EMPLOYMENT RELATIONSHIPS
1. Will you sever all connections with your present employers,
business firms, associations, or organizations if you are confirmed by
the Senate? If not, provide details.
Yes.
2. Do you have any plans, commitments, or agreements to pursue
outside employment, with or without compensation, during your service
with the government? If so, provide details.
No.
3. Has any person or entity made a commitment or agreement to employ
your services in any capacity after you leave government service? If
so, provide details.
No.
4. If you are confirmed by the Senate, do you expect to serve out
your full term or until the next presidential election, whichever is
applicable? If not, explain.
Yes.
C. POTENTIAL CONFLICTS OF INTEREST
1. Indicate any investments, obligations, liabilities, or other
relationships which could involve potential conflicts of interest in
the position to which you have been nominated.
None.
2. Describe any business relationship, dealing, or financial
transaction which you have had during the last 10 years, whether for
yourself, on behalf of a client, or acting as an agent, that could in
any way constitute or result in a possible conflict of interest in the
position to which you have been nominated.
Any such potential conflict of interest is addressed in and
resolved by my ethics agreement with the Office of the United States
Trade Representative.
3. Describe any activity during the past 10 years in which you have
engaged for the purpose of directly or indirectly influencing the
passage, defeat, or modification of any legislation or affecting the
administration and execution of law or public policy. Activities
performed as an employee of the Federal Government need not be listed.
I was registered as a lobbyist for United States Steel Corporation
(``U.S. Steel'') from the 4th quarter of 2007 to the 1st quarter of
2009 and from the 4th quarter of 2014 to the 2nd quarter of 2016. On
behalf of U.S. Steel, I performed legal research, drafted memoranda,
and met with congressional staff and other U.S. Government officials in
an effort to maintain and strengthen U.S. trade laws.
4. Explain how you will resolve any potential conflict of interest,
including any that may be disclosed by your responses to the above
items.
I am entering into an ethics agreement with the Office of the
United States Trade Representative.
5. Two copies of written opinions should be provided directly to the
committee by the designated agency ethics officer of the agency to
which you have been nominated and by the Office of Government Ethics
concerning potential conflicts of interest or any legal impediments to
your serving in this position.
Submitted.
6. The following information is to be provided only by nominees to
the positions of United States Trade Representative and Deputy United
States Trade Representative.
Have you ever represented, advised, or otherwise aided a foreign
government or a foreign political organization with respect to any
international trade matter? If so, provide the name of the foreign
entity, a description of the work performed (including any work you
supervised), the time frame of the work (e.g., March to December 1995),
and the number of hours spent on the representation.
In February and March 2003, I performed research and prepared a
memo for the Government of Bermuda regarding the application of the
World Trade Organization agreements to Bermuda. I billed 70.5 hours to
this matter.
D. LEGAL AND OTHER MATTERS
1. Have you ever been the subject of a complaint or been
investigated, disciplined, or otherwise cited for a breach of ethics
for unprofessional conduct before any court, administrative agency,
professional association, disciplinary committee, or other professional
group? If so, provide details.
No.
2. Have you ever been investigated, arrested, charged, or held by any
Federal, State, or other law enforcement authority for a violation of
any Federal, State, county, or municipal law, regulation, or ordinance,
other than a minor traffic offense? If so, provide details.
In approximately October 1988 (when I was 19 years old), I was
arrested in Weston, MA for the offense of transportation of alcohol by
a minor. Three friends and I were driving around looking for a party.
We were pulled over by the police after we became lost and
inadvertently turned down a private road. After we were pulled over, we
were all arrested for transportation of alcohol by a minor because we
had either a 6-pack or 12-pack of beer in the car. The 6-pack or 12-
pack of beer was not opened. I was not driving the car, and none of us
had been drinking. I appeared before the court (which I believe was the
Waltham District Court in Waltham, MA) on one occasion, and my
understanding is that the charge was dropped as long as I did not have
any additional problems for a 6-month period. I did not have any
additional problems.
3. Have you ever been involved as a party in interest in any
administrative agency proceeding or civil litigation? If so, provide
details.
No.
4. Have you ever been convicted (including pleas of guilty or nolo
contendere) of any criminal violation other than a minor traffic
offense? If so, provide details.
No.
5. Please advise the committee of any additional information,
favorable or unfavorable, which you feel should be considered in
connection with your nomination.
None.
E. TESTIFYING BEFORE CONGRESS
1. If you are confirmed by the Senate, are you willing to appear and
testify before any duly constituted committee of the Congress on such
occasions as you may be reasonably requested to do so?
Yes.
2. If you are confirmed by the Senate, are you willing to provide
such information as is requested by such committees?
Yes.
______
Questions Submitted for the Record to Jeffrey Gerrish
Questions Submitted by Hon. Orrin G. Hatch
Question. I am growing increasingly concerned that several
proposals the administration may be considering for NAFTA will
undermine the certainty U.S. businesses, investors, and exporters need
to take advantage of the agreement.
Do you agree that trade agreements will only benefit American
businesses, investors, farmers, and ranchers if they provide certainty
and stability?
Answer. There are many factors that determine whether a trade
agreement benefits America. If confirmed, I will work with you and
other members of Congress to ensure that our workers and producers
continue to benefit from our trade policy.
Question. Intellectual property and innovation drive productivity,
employment, and economic growth in the United States. The United States
Patent and Trademark Office reports that IP-intensive industries are
responsible for 45.5 million American jobs, nearly 30 percent of the
American workforce, and that wages in the sector are 46 percent higher
than outside the sector. If the Trump administration wants trade deals
that create high-paying jobs at home, then U.S. FTAs must provide an
environment that supports intellectual property rights and innovation.
How will you ensure that any U.S. free trade agreements provide
strong protection for IP-intensive industries, as required by TPA?
Answer. I believe that innovation is key to our comparative
advantage in many sectors. If confirmed, I will work to ensure that
free trade agreements provide for U.S. rights holders to have a full
and fair opportunity to use and profit from their intellectual property
rights. Ensuring strong intellectual property protection and
enforcement by our trading partners will be a top trade priority.
Question. We are doing far too little to address one of President
Trump's highest priorities: combating the predatory treatment U.S.
businesses and workers receive at the hands of China.
In your view, which country's trade practices are doing the most
harm to U.S. businesses and workers, and if confirmed, how do you plan
to address those practices?
Answer. The President has made clear that we need to restore
balance to the U.S.-China trade relationship, and that means reducing
our very large bilateral trade deficit and ensuring that trade is
freer, fairer, and balanced for America. China, by far, poses the
greatest risk to our economy due to its unfair trade practices and
distortive economic policy. If I am confirmed, I will look at how I can
best work to ensure that our engagement with China is effective and
results-oriented.
Question Submitted by Hon. Michael B. Enzi
Question. The U.S. soda ash industry is a shining example of U.S.
competitiveness in manufacturing. The U.S. industry is the most
environmentally friendly of its kind in the world due to our unique
natural deposits of trona in Wyoming. The industry exports over $1
billion annually, over half its total output. The U.S. soda ash
industry, however, faces stiff barriers in the global marketplace.
For example, U.S. soda ash exports face tariffs that range from 3.3
percent to 11 percent in key growth markets, as well as several non-
tariff barriers.
As the Deputy USTR whose portfolio includes industrial
competitiveness, will you commit to strengthening the competitiveness
of the U.S. soda ash industry by lowering tariff and non-tariff
barriers in foreign markets?
Answer. U.S. soda ash exporters are among the most competitive in
the world, and export markets are essential to the health of the
industry. Most other countries competing for soda ash markets have much
more environmentally harmful production methods. If confirmed, I will
work to remove barriers to U.S. soda ash exports, particularly unfair
and distortive non-tariff barriers, but also tariffs.
______
Questions Submitted by Hon. John Cornyn
Question. Following up on a letter I co-signed with 15 other
Senators last month, I am concerned that American financial services
providers still face significant market access barriers and level
playing field issues in China. For example, insurance and pension
providers face a situation where Chinese insurance firms are actively
expanding into foreign markets, including the United States, where they
face no equity caps, for example; where by contrast, China maintains a
specific 50% equity cap for this sector, but is home to the world's
largest insurer and where 95 percent of market share belongs to
domestic providers. A similar picture exists, with corresponding equity
caps, with respect to China's banking and securities sectors. Removal
of the equity caps and other restrictions on foreign ownership of most
Chinese financial services companies will build more confidence in the
investment climate in China, and greater market access for U.S.
insurers and reinsurers will lead to increased financial stability and
diversification of local risks to the global economy.
Do you see this issue as a key priority for USTR and the United
States moving forward as part of the U.S.-China Comprehensive Economic
Dialogue?
Answer. I recognize the importance of removing China's foreign
equity cap for life and pensions insurance and foreign equity caps for
other financial services, such as securities services, for U.S.
companies that wish to provide financial services in China. If
confirmed, I will work to use all possible avenues, including high-
level discussions, to raise U.S. concerns with China and to endeavor to
fully open China's market for financial services.
Question. I firmly believe that a modernized NAFTA agreement must
be negotiated in a manner that will grow America's competitiveness and
sustain and grow American jobs. Congress has laid out detailed
objectives to achieve those outcomes in TPA. Thus far, I am concerned,
and have heard increasing concerns across every sector of the economy--
from energy and manufacturing to agriculture and services--that the
administration is developing and putting forward proposals, in a number
of key areas, such as investor-state dispute settlement, rules of
origin and government procurement, which may undermine U.S.
competitiveness.
If confirmed, do you intend to continue consulting with the
relevant committees of jurisdiction on these issues and propose items
that are fully consistent with Congress's direction?
Answer. If confirmed, I intend to consult with the relevant
committees of jurisdiction on issues that fall under my purview to
ensure all views are both heard and considered as the negotiation
continues to move forward.
Question. NAFTA modernization presents a real opportunity for
companies whose business models had not been invented or had fully
evolved when the original agreement was negotiated. There is some
concern that the administration will not fight for their digital
priorities in the negotiations, including provisions to facilitate e-
commerce shipments, protect against data flow restrictions and data
localization requirements, and require liability protections consistent
with U.S. law.
Can you please elaborate on your stance on these important issues
and will you commit to pushing for the inclusion of these provisions in
a final agreement?
Answer. I can assure you that I recognize the importance of the
digital economy to American jobs, prosperity and security, as well as
U.S. companies' unique competitive advantages in this area. Addressing
the specific issues that you have identified, including restrictions on
cross-border data flows and data localization measures, in all sectors
of the economy, will be important to preserve U.S. firms' international
competitiveness. If confirmed, I will work both with my colleagues at
USTR, as well as across agencies, to ensure the U.S. companies maintain
their advantage.
______
Questions Submitted by Hon. Patrick J. Toomey
Question. Canada and Mexico represent the two largest foreign
markets for
Pennsylvania-made products, accounting for $13.6 billion in exported
goods during 2016. In light of the ongoing NAFTA negotiations, I am
hopeful that Ambassador Lighthizer will reach a deal that will allow
the United States to continue the free trade of goods and services
throughout North America. However, I am concerned about a recent
proposal to include a sunset clause in NAFTA--in which the agreement
would terminate after 5 years unless all three parties agree it should
continue. Certainty and stability are vital to our trade relationships
in order to create a pro-investment environment that fosters economic
growth and job creation. A sunset clause would achieve neither.
Do you believe that a sunset clause in NAFTA will promote economic
growth and create the business confidence needed to foster investment
in job-creating industries? What economic benefits do you see from a
sunset provision? If confirmed, will you oppose the inclusion of such a
mechanism in NAFTA?
Answer. I have not been involved in NAFTA negotiations and have not
reviewed the text. If confirmed, I will work with and advise Ambassador
Lighthizer as he sees fit regarding these issues, and I will work with
you and other members of Congress to ensure that our workers and
producers continue to benefit from our trade policy.
Question. I have heard from businesses across Pennsylvania about
the importance of maintaining strong investor-state dispute settlement
(ISDS) provisions in NAFTA. ISDS procedures ensure that other countries
treat U.S. investors fairly, do not seize their property without
compensation, and do not impose forced localization requirements that
compel jobs to be shipped overseas. In a recent letter to several
Cabinet-level officials, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, National
Association of Manufacturers, and Business Roundtable wrote that
``attempts to eliminate or weaken ISDS will harm American businesses
and workers and, as a consequence, will serve to undermine business
community support for the NAFTA modernization negotiations.'' ISDS
provisions are necessary to ensure that U.S. businesses and their
employees are protected from unpredictable action overseas.
The administration is said to be proposing an opt-in clause that
would allow the United States to avoid being subject to ISDS while
Mexico and Canada may still be motivated to accept it.
Do you support the inclusion of an opt-in clause in NAFTA? If yes,
how will this benefit U.S. firms operating in other countries,
especially when a significant portion of the business community opposes
this proposal? If no, how will you advocate for strong ISDS provisions
when discussing the issue with other administration officials?
Answer. I have not been involved in NAFTA negotiations and have not
reviewed the text. If confirmed, I will work with and advise Ambassador
Lighthizer as he sees fit regarding these issues.
______
Questions Submitted by Hon. Ron Wyden
Question. Mr. Gerrish, you have worked on trade enforcement for the
steel industry for years and will be responsible for industry-related
issues in your capacity as Deputy USTR, including talks at the OECD
designed to address steel overcapacity. Recently, Secretary Ross said
that the decision had been made to delay the section 232 investigation
into whether steel imports are threatening our national security until
after tax reform. USTR is part of the interagency group that advises
the President on the section 232 proceeding, and you have been
nominated to advise on U.S. trade policies related to industrial
competitiveness, including with respect to steel.
Do you agree with the Secretary that the section 232 investigation
should be delayed?
What impact does delay have on U.S. industry?
Answer. The current global overcapacity situation in the steel and
aluminum industry is having a detrimental impact on U.S. workers and
industries. At the core of this issue is China's non-market economy
system, which is creating global oversupply and excess capacity in
these and other sectors.
Regarding Commerce's investigation on steel imports under section
232 of the Trade Expansion Act of 1962, I understand that Commerce has
270 days to deliver its report and any recommendations to the
President. I cannot engage in speculation about the potential impact
that timing of results in this investigation may have on the U.S.
domestic stakeholders, as Commerce has not yet concluded its
investigation and I have not been included in these discussions.
Question. The President has suggested from time to time that the
United States should withdraw from NAFTA and, more recently, the U.S.-
Korea trade agreement. Talks are underway with respect to both
agreements, but have not concluded.
What impact would withdrawal from these trade agreements have on
American exporters of manufactured goods?
Answer. Our free trade agreement with Korea has been a
disappointment. By the end of 2016 our deficit in goods with Korea had
more than doubled since the agreement went into effect. And, our
combined goods and services deficit with Korea had nearly tripled. Our
large autos trade imbalance with Korea is a particular concern and
requires a comprehensive approach to resolve. If confirmed, I will make
this a top priority in our bilateral engagement and I will fight to
correct this long-term imbalance--starting with making sure all
barriers are removed for U.S. manufacturing exports to Korea.
Question. This administration, including the Office of the U.S.
Trade Representative, has fallen short on transparency and
consultations with Congress, stakeholders and the public. Getting more
transparency in our trade policy has been a top priority for me. We
won't end up with trade deals that benefit all Americans if we can't
talk about proposals at town halls. That is why I insisted on new
requirements to raise the bar when it comes to transparency.
If confirmed, do you commit to consulting closely with Congress and
follow the letter and spirit of all transparency and consultations
requirements established by the Trade Promotion Authority bill Congress
passed in 2015 (including the Guidelines on Transparency and Public
Engagement issued by USTR in October 2015) and the enforcement bill
passed in 2016?
Answer. If confirmed, I commit to following the consultation
requirements required by law and to follow the Guidelines on
Transparency and Public Engagement issued by USTR in October 2015.
Question. The Generalized System of Preferences (GSP) program is
scheduled to expire at the end of this year. I have long supported a
robust GSP program as both an essential tool to lower cost for American
manufacturing, as well as a key development tool for future trading
partners.
Do you support the extension of the GSP program through calendar
year 2021?
Answer. Yes, I support GSP reauthorization, although I believe
there needs to be robust enforcement of the eligibility criteria, which
is something that I understand the administration has indicated it
committed to doing. I defer to Congress on the length of time of the
renewal.
Question. U.S. businesses face a host of barriers to trade and
investment in China. In April, leadership of the Ways and Means and
Senate Finance Committees highlighted some key priorities with respect
to China in a bipartisan letter to the President in advance of his
meeting with President Xi. Since that letter was sent, little progress
has been made on the issues it identified, including: (1) policies that
contribute to market distorting overcapacity; (2) discriminatory and
distortive technology policies, such as data localization requirements
and restrictions on cloud services providers; (3) weak IP protection,
including economically motivated cyberattacks and lax protections
against counterfeiting; (4) barriers to U.S. agriculture exports; (5)
currency policies that are not based on market-determined exchange
rates; and (6) retaliation against U.S. companies and general lack of
transparency in China's legal regimes.
Which of the above issues do you intend, if confirmed, to
prioritize in discussions with China during the next 6 to 12 months,
including as part of the Comprehensive Economic Dialogue?
For each issue, please identify the specific tools that in your
view are available to the administration to ensure progress with China
and how you would, if confirmed, use those tools to address the
concerns raised?
Answer. We have numerous trade issues with China, including those
you identified. In particular, with respect to excess capacity, China
has expanded capacity in sectors like steel, aluminum and solar panels
well beyond what market signals would have generated, and the resulting
over-production has been causing serious harm to our industries and
workers.
China also has begun to pursue a range of problematic industrial
policies, such as Made in China 2025, designed to create or accelerate
artificially China's ability to become a manufacturing leader in
several high technology, high value-added industries, like information
technology, aviation, electric vehicles, and medical devices. China's
policies provide preferences to Chinese technology and products and
seek to acquire advanced technologies from other countries, often
through unfair means. We need to protect our technology and ensure a
level playing field and an open market in China. Intellectual property
rights protection in China, of course, is another area of serious
concern, as is agricultural market access.
I am committed to the appropriate use of the full range of U.S.
trade policy and enforcement tools to ensure progress in all of these
areas. If confirmed, I look forward to working with you on these
matters.
Question. The European Union is one of the most important export
markets for the United States. But, in too many areas, U.S. businesses
and farmers face significant barriers to the EU market. The Obama
administration had launched Transatlantic Trade and Investment
Partnership negotiations with the EU to address those barriers.
Do you support restarting those discussions, and how would you
improve our trade relationship with the EU?
Answer. The U.S.-EU economic relationship is a critical pillar of
mutual prosperity and I believe it can become even stronger. I
understand the administration is thinking carefully about T-TIP and on
the question of whether, when, and how to move these trade negotiations
forward. However, before a decision is made on whether to resume
negotiations on a comprehensive trade agreement, we will want to be
confident that there are promising paths to resolution of the most
sensitive issues. For example, with a significant trade deficit in food
and agriculture, the United States needs to substantially improve
exports of U.S. food and agriculture to the EU. If confirmed, I look
forward to consulting with Congress on these questions.
______
Questions Submitted by Hon. Debbie Stabenow
Question. If confirmed, you will be leading USTR's efforts in the
Asia-Pacific region? What are your main priorities with respect to
U.S.-China trade relations? Please be specific.
How do you plan to counter China's unfair and harmful trade
practices, particularly on intellectual property theft, subsidization
of its domestic industries, and market access restrictions?
How do you plan to address the issue of Chinese steel overcapacity
and how will you work with our allies to combat this global issue?
How do you plan to address Japan's significantly closed market for
U.S. automakers?
With respect to the recent announcement that the United States and
South Korea will amend the 2012 U.S.-Korea Free Trade Agreement, how
will you work to secure policy reforms that open South Korea's market
to U.S. automakers, and what are your main priorities for amending this
agreement?
Answer. With regard to your questions about China, we have numerous
trade issues with China, but there are some issues that stand out,
including all of those you identified. China has begun to pursue a
range of industrial policies, such as Made in China 2025, designed to
create or accelerate artificially China's ability to become a
manufacturing leader in several high technology, high value-added
industries, like information technology, aviation, electric vehicles,
and medical devices. China's policies provide preferences to Chinese
technology and products and seek to acquire advanced technologies from
other countries, often through unfair means. We need to protect our
technology and ensure a level playing field and an open market in
China. Intellectual property rights protection in China, of course, is
another area of serious concern. I am committed to the appropriate use
of the full range of U.S. trade policy and enforcement tools to ensure
progress in all of these areas. If confirmed, I look forward to working
with you on these matters.
With regard to the issue of steel, China needs to fix its unfair
trade practices and its vast excess capacity problem. I understand that
USTR is currently conducting a review of all the available tools to
address the serious overcapacity problems in steel and other products.
At the same time, we need to address the root causes of those problems,
and as part of that effort I understand that USTR is continuing to work
closely with other leading steel producing countries in the Global
Forum on Steel Excess Capacity and other contexts. The goal of the
Global Forum is to work with other governments to take effective steps
to address excess steel capacity in China and elsewhere by addressing
the underlying causes such as government subsidies and other government
assistance.
I believe USTR is also working with the Department of Commerce,
Customs and Border Protection, and other agencies to ensure that we
enforce our trade remedy laws and measures effectively at the U.S.
border. In addition, as you know, the Department of Commerce is
conducting an investigation of steel trade pursuant to section 232 of
the Trade Expansion Act of 1962.
Question. I have serious concerns about China's effort to attain
market economy status at the WTO. The European Union recently announced
that unless there are ``significant market distortions'' they will
treat all WTO members the same with regard to dumping determinations.
How do you see this policy change affecting the debate on China's
market economy status within the WTO?
How will you work to ensure that China continues to be treated as a
non-market economy?
Answer. In my view, China is not a market economy and is not
entitled to market economy status. It would make no sense to treat such
a distorted economy the same as a market economy. Ambassador Lighthizer
has been clear that USTR will vigorously defend our right under WTO
rules to use a non-market economy methodology for antidumping
investigations. If confirmed, I will support those efforts to work
together with our partners and allies around the globe to defend our
rights under the WTO.
Question. Currency manipulation is one of the most egregious 21st-
century trade barriers and has led to the loss of millions of jobs in
our country, including in Michigan.
Do you support including strong, enforceable currency provisions in
future trade agreements?
Do you support including currency provisions in NAFTA?
How will you respond when countries like China and Japan are found
to manipulate their currencies?
Answer. Currency manipulation is an issue on which the
administration is focused. The Trump administration is examining the
full array of policy tools available to combat currency manipulation,
including enforceable trade commitments. If confirmed, I will work with
you and other members of Congress, as well as with other administration
officials, to develop an effective approach for addressing this
problem.
Question. Geographical indication (GI) restrictions for food names
have been a persistent challenge with the EU. Just this week, the EU
approved a Geographical Indication for a term that has long had a Codex
product standard.
Do you agree that Codex product standards represent common names?
If you are confirmed, will you prioritize addressing the EU's attempts
to restrict U.S. exports through the use of GIs?
Answer. I recognize that geographical indications (GIs) reduce
market access for many U.S. food exports. If confirmed, I will raise
strong concerns regarding the impact of the EU's GI policies on market
access for U.S. owners of trademarks and U.S. producers and traders
using common food names.
Question. Will you take action to defend U.S. products against non-
tariff trade barriers that conflict with science-based standards?
Answer. If confirmed, I will use all tools available to reduce and
prevent barriers to U.S. exports arising from regulations of our
trading partners that are insufficiently grounded in science and risk.
Often such regulations harm agricultural production, food security, and
trade without providing meaningful benefits to public health or the
environment.
______
Question Submitted by Hon. Maria Cantwell
Question. According to media reports, President Trump is conducting
a comprehensive review of U.S. policy toward China. One issue I'd like
to highlight is cloud computing. China has placed many limits on cloud
computing services in China. It has made it very difficult for U.S.
companies to operate and put them at a clear competitive disadvantage
to local Chinese companies. This is unfortunate because China is a
tremendous market and should present great opportunities for U.S.
companies. The Chinese market for cloud services may reach $20 billion
by 2020 according to some estimates.
What will the administration do to address this problem?
Answer. I recognize that U.S. leadership in the technology sector,
including in the area of cloud computing, is one of our great national
strengths and a source of our international competitiveness. I agree
that our trade policy should work to ensure that U.S. companies in this
sector can thrive globally, including in China, where I recognize that
barriers have been severe and contrast sharply with the open market in
the United States. If confirmed, I will make seeking progress in
reducing barriers to U.S. companies in this sector--including in the
China market--a priority.
______
Questions Submitted by Hon. Robert Menendez
Question. We've heard from the President and others that one of the
administration's main goals in trade negotiations should be to reduce
our bilateral trade deficit.
Do you agree that this should be USTR's main priority?
What do you think has been the administration's biggest
accomplishment in reducing our trade deficit with China, and what
impact, in dollar terms, have those actions had on our trade deficit
with China?
What future action can we expect from the administration to address
our trade deficit with China?
Answer. The President's and USTR's main priority is to implement a
trade policy that benefits America's workers, farmers, ranchers, and
businessmen. The trade deficit is indeed a concern in that it
represents structural problems in global trade. USTR believes that as
markets become fairer and trade becomes freer, U.S. companies and
workers will be more competitive and our trade deficits will decline.
Concerning China, the administration has been working on a number
of fronts--pushing China to open markets and increasing U.S. exports,
as well as initiating enforcement actions, including a Section 301
investigation on forced tech transfer, to make sure that China plays by
the rules.
The President has made clear that we need to restore balance to the
U.S.-China trade relationship, and that means reducing our very large
bilateral trade deficit and ensuring that trade is freer, fairer, and
balanced for America. At nearly $350 billion last year, it is by far
the largest trade deficit that we have with any country. We are
focusing our efforts on removing trade barriers and eliminating unfair
trade practices that contribute to the trade deficit.
Question. China has had a decades-long pattern of manipulating
their currency, stealing our intellectual property, dumping products
onto world markets, and systematically skirting their trade
obligations. Leveling the playing field for American workers by taking
aggressive action to stop China from gaming the international trading
regime was a key theme of the President's campaign, and I hope the
administration will follow through on that promise.
Do you believe that China is a currency manipulator?
If confirmed, what are you going to do to ensure that countries
stop manipulating their currency?
Is the administration going to continue the bilateral investment
treaty negotiations with China? Will you pursue another type of trade
agreement with China?
Answer. With regard to your questions about currency, currency
manipulation is an issue on which President Trump campaigned, and he
and his administration remain focused on. It is my understanding that
the administration is examining the full array of policy tools
available to combat currency manipulation, including trade commitments.
With regard to your question about bilateral investment treaties
and other agreements, it is my understanding that the administration is
reviewing trade agreements and negotiations to determine where U.S.
interests can be advanced.
Question. We have seen a disturbing trend in recent years whereby
some of our trading partners have ignored their international
commitments, particularly with respect to intellectual property
protection, either by failing to fully implement agreements or by
flouting the rules in order to give their businesses an unfair
advantage. These decisions are short-sighted and ultimately discourage
innovation, investment and job growth.
What do you believe USTR should be doing to ensure our trading
partners are enforcing existing commitments and deter countries from
weakening such standards in their own IP regimes?
Answer. I agree that we need to do more to enforce the IPR
provisions of our trade agreements. If confirmed, I will seek to use
all appropriate trade tools to ensure that U.S. rights holders have a
full and fair opportunity to use and profit from their intellectual
property rights. Ensuring strong intellectual property protection and
enforcement by our trading partners will be a top trade priority.
______
Questions Submitted by Hon. Sherrod Brown
Question. Will you commit to making trade enforcement against
China's unfair trade practices a top priority of your tenure at USTR?
If so, what specific enforcement efforts against China will you commit
to considering if confirmed?
Answer. I intend to focus my efforts on removing trade barriers and
eliminating unfair trade practices that contribute to the trade
deficit. If I am confirmed, I will look at how I can best work to
ensure that our engagement with China is effective and results-
oriented, which will include robust enforcement. I am committed to the
appropriate use of the full range of U.S. trade policy and enforcement
tools including WTO dispute settlement and U.S. law to ensure progress
across the range of China's unfair trade practices. If confirmed, I
look forward to working with you on this issue.
Question. If confirmed, what steps would you take to increase
China's compliance with its WTO obligations?
Answer. If I am confirmed, I will look at how I can best work to
ensure China's compliance with its WTO obligations. I am committed to
the appropriate use of the full range of U.S. trade policy and
enforcement tools, including WTO dispute settlement, to ensure progress
across the range of China's unfair trade practices. If confirmed, I
look forward to working with you on this issue.
Question. Do you agree that we should place a permanent freeze on
the Bilateral Investment Treaty talks with China until they fully
comply with all of their existing trade obligations with the United
States?
Answer. If confirmed, I would place a high priority on utilizing a
broad range of tools to ensure that China treats the United States,
U.S. exports and U.S. companies fairly with respect to trade and
investment. As far as the BIT, I understand that it is not under active
negotiation right now, and I would take Chinese practices into account
before making any recommendation to move forward.
Question. Do you believe the Trans-Pacific Partnership text should
be used as the basis for future U.S. trade agreements, including the
NAFTA renegotiation?
Answer. It is my understanding that, in formulating trade policy,
the administration is looking at all precedents and seeking
improvements that best serve the interests of American workers,
manufacturers, farmers and ranchers. With respect to the NAFTA
specifically, I understand USTR is guided by the objectives included in
TPA, as well as its extensive consultations with the Congress, and
industry and civil society stakeholders. While, if confirmed, my
portfolio would not include geographic responsibility for the Western
Hemisphere and NAFTA, I will continue to work with you and other
members of Congress to ensure that future trade agreements meet TPA
objectives.
Question. Do you agree that our trading partners' weaker
environmental and labor standards undermine U.S. industrial
competitiveness? If so, what steps will you take to strengthen our
trading partners' environmental and labor standards, and, therefore,
U.S. industrial competitiveness, if confirmed?
Answer. Labor and Environment protections are important negotiating
objectives that Congress has set out in TPA. If confirmed, I look
forward to consulting closely with you and other members of Congress
with an interest in using our trade agreements and enforcement efforts
to promote high-standard protections for workers and the environment to
ensure a level playing field for American workers and businesses
consistent with TPA objectives.
______
Questions Submitted by Hon. Robert P. Casey, Jr.
Question. Mr. Gerrish, did you look into registering to vote in
Maryland, or was it always your intention to vote in the State of the
Virginia for the general election?
Answer. I did not look into registering to vote in Maryland. I
believed that I still had more time under the grace period to vote in
Virginia and voted there pursuant to that belief.
Question. Mr. Gerrish, did you hold a valid Maryland ID at the time
of the 2016 election?
Answer. I did not hold a valid Maryland ID at the time of the 2016
election.
Question. Mr. Gerrish, you mentioned in your testimony you had paid
property taxes in Virginia. In which State were you paying property
taxes in November 2016?
Answer. As I mentioned in my testimony, I was responsible for
paying personal property taxes in Virginia in November 2016. The
personal property taxes were owed on my vehicle. I also was paying
property taxes on my home in Maryland in November 2016.
Question. Mr. Gerrish, is the address on your Virginia driver's
license, which you presented to election officials for the November
2016 election, the same as your residence in Virginia under which you
were registered?
Answer. The address on my Virginia driver's license was the same as
the address under which I was registered.
Question. Mr. Gerrish, do you agree that adopting or maintaining
lax labor and environmental standards is not a legitimate way for
governments to manufacture a competitive advantage for their exporters?
Answer. Labor and Environment protections are important negotiating
objectives that Congress has set out in TPA. If confirmed, I look
forward to consulting closely with you and other members of Congress
with an interest in using our trade agreements and enforcement efforts
to promote high-standard protections for workers and the environment to
ensure a level playing field for American workers and businesses
consistent with TPA objectives.
Question. Mr. Gerrish, please discuss your experience as it relates
to intellectual property rights and intellectual property theft. How
will that experience inform your work in ensuring U.S. IP is protected
and what you will prioritize in this space? Please discuss what steps
do you intend to build on, and initiate, to protect U.S. intellectual
property from both coercive appropriation, and conventional and cyber-
enabled economic espionage?
Answer. As a member of the private bar, I've been fortunate to
provide legal advice on a wide-range of trade matters and disputes, in
domestic and international forums. As a result, I am under no illusions
as to the challenges confronting U.S. companies in protecting
themselves from coercive and otherwise unfair practices, including as
to their critical investments in intellectual property. Drawing on this
experience, I share the administration's intention to use all possible
sources of leverage to encourage trading partners to open their markets
to U.S. exports of goods and services and provide adequate and
effective protection of U.S. intellectual property rights. If
confirmed, I look forward to working with you in pursuit of these
important objectives.
Question. According to the American Iron and Steel Institute, the
steel industry employs about 19,000 people in Pennsylvania, and is one
of Pennsylvania's biggest economic drivers.\1\ The steel and aluminum
industries are facing a crisis because of global overcapacity, stemming
from China. This issue is exacerbated by the administration's failure
to act on its Section 232 steel investigation. Delay has resulted in a
sustained increase in imports of steel to the United States compared to
last year.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ https://www.steel.org//media/Files/AISI/Public%20Policy/
Member%20Map/2016/Pennsylvania.pdf?la=en.
Can you share what actions you intend to take to press China and
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
other countries on overcapacity?
Please discuss how you will work with our allies, including the EU,
on taking collective action on this issue.
Answer. The current global overcapacity situation in the steel and
aluminum industry is having a detrimental impact on U.S. workers and
industries. At the core of this issue is China's non-market economy
system, which is creating global oversupply and excess capacity in
these and other sectors.
To address this serious problem, I understand that the
administration is working to address both the root causes and
manifestations of the problem and is evaluating every appropriate tool
in our arsenal. I would want to work closely with other countries in
the Global Steel Forum and other fora. If confirmed, I would also look
to WTO enforcement mechanisms and U.S. law as avenues to address unfair
advantages arising from this situation.
Regarding Commerce's investigations on steel and aluminum imports
under section 232 of the Trade Expansion Act of 1962, I understand that
Commerce has 270 days to deliver its report and any recommendations to
the President. I cannot engage in speculation about the potential
impact that decisions on timing of these investigations may have on
U.S. domestic stakeholders, as Commerce has not yet concluded its
investigations.
Question. With respect to uncompetitive market concentration of
products or production, please discuss how you hope to work with the
Department of Justice's antitrust division to evaluate the impact on
prices in the United States, and where appropriate, develop remedies.
Answer. USTR and the U.S. Department of Justice work closely across
a broad array of areas related to competition law and the anti-
competitive effects in the U.S. market. If confirmed, I will examine
this issue closely and advise the Ambassador on potential relevant next
steps.
Question. Do you intend to recommend the USTR self-initiate trade
cases when the situation calls for it? If so, do you believe the
current funding and staffing levels at USTR are sufficient to execute
this agenda?
Answer. I believe it is appropriate to self-initiate cases. We will
use all of the resources at our disposal to do this when there is a
suitable case.
Question. Do you support the inclusion of Investor State Dispute
Settlement (ISDS) in its current form in future trade agreements?
Answer. The United States has an open and fair judicial system, and
we should be skeptical about subjecting U.S. laws and regulations to
private arbitration. Moreover, I believe that our trade agreements
should be drafted to avoid off-shoring U.S. jobs. Any provisions on
ISDS should take those considerations into full account.
Question. How would you amend ISDS to ensure no special legal
protection is afforded to offshoring jobs?
Answer. The United States has an open and fair judicial system, and
we should be skeptical about subjecting U.S. laws and regulations to
private arbitration. Moreover, I believe that our trade agreements
should be drafted to avoid off-shoring U.S. jobs. Any provisions on
ISDS should take those considerations into full account.
______
Prepared Statement of Hon. Orrin G. Hatch,
a U.S. Senator From Utah
WASHINGTON--Senate Finance Committee Chairman Orrin Hatch (R-Utah)
today delivered the following opening statement at a hearing to
consider the nominations of Jeffery Gerrish to serve as Deputy United
States Trade Representative, Gregory Doud to serve a Chief Agricultural
Negotiator at the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative, and Jason
Kearns to serve as a member of the International Trade Commission
(ITC).
When you look over the respective resumes of each of these
nominees, it's clear that the President has selected individuals who
are well-qualified and well-prepared to serve in these important posts.
That's a good thing.
There's quite a bit going on in the trade world at the moment. The
Trump administration has a number of ambitious goals and Congress has a
key role to play with all of them. Among other things, we need to make
sure the administration is well-staffed, and I hope we'll be able to
take some steps toward that end with the advancement of these nominees.
I'd prefer to let the nominees describe their backgrounds and
qualifications on their own. However, I do want to address an issue
that has been raised with respect to Mr. Gerrish's nomination.
Members of the committee already have all of the facts, and they
are pretty straightforward.
Mr. Gerrish was a resident of Virginia until June 2016, at which
time he moved to Maryland. However, in November 2016, Mr. Gerrish voted
in the general election in the Commonwealth of Virginia.
Mr. Gerrish voted where he shouldn't have. It's that simple.
He has been open with the committee about this matter during the
vetting process and has cooperated with committee staff's efforts to
understand exactly what happened. I am sure that Mr. Gerrish will be
willing to respond to questions about this matter today.
My hope is that, at the end of today's hearing, committee members
will have enough information to judge each nominee on the basis of
their experience, knowledge, and qualifications for the position to
which they have been nominated.
With that out of the way, I want to once again thank the nominees
for being here today. I look forward to hearing your statements and,
hopefully, to working with you in the future.
______
Prepared Statement of Jason Kearns, Nominated to be a Member of the
United States International Trade Commission
Chairman Hatch, Ranking Member Wyden, members of the Finance
Committee, I am honored to appear before you today as the President's
nominee for the position of Commissioner on the U.S. International
Trade Commission.
I would like to introduce the members of my family who are with me
here today. I wouldn't be here without the love and constant support of
my wife, Lindy Arnof Kearns, who manages the logistical mess of our
busy lives while adding levity to our home. I am also very proud of my
three children, Eleanore (14), Keevan (12), and Sander (9), who help me
keep things in perspective. My mother, Betsy Starks, has taught me to
stand up for my principles and to stick to them. And I'm proud of my
sister, Lauren Sulcove, who serves as First Assistant District Attorney
in Franklin County, PA.
I would like to thank all of my family, those who are living and
those who have passed, for all of their support over the years. I also
thank my mentors, colleagues, and friends for their help.
I seek this position after serving the past 11 years as trade
counsel to the House Committee on Ways and Means. I want to thank Ways
and Means for that honor. I also want to express my appreciation to
Representatives Levin and Rangel, and Senator Wyden, for first
recommending my appointment as a Commissioner several years ago, and to
Presidents Obama and Trump for nominating me.
I am also grateful to Senate Minority Leader Schumer for his
support, as well as the support I have received from this committee,
including the chairman, the ranking member, and Senator Bennet from my
great home State of Colorado.
The ITC administers the trade remedy laws--or, as Senator Isakson
so aptly put it in our meeting last week, it serves as an ``umpire,''
calling balls and strikes. The ITC also provides Congress and the
executive branch with independent analysis and information on matters
relating to tariffs and international trade, that is, raw materials
from which policy makers may craft and execute trade policy.
In my view, the work of the ITC may be more important today than
ever before, as trade has become a much larger part of our economy, and
as policymakers consider and debate trade policy reforms.
I believe my upbringing, education, and work experience have
prepared me well for this role. I grew up in a farming town of 500
people in Colorado, where I learned to enjoy hard work, whether it was
the midnight feedings of my 4-H lambs or being the first kid at my high
school in the morning to work on my jump shot. In small towns, you
learn to do your part, and you learn to try to get along. And that's
where I developed a deep respect for people who work with their hands
for a living.
Since moving away from that small town, I have learned about trade
from a wide variety of perspectives, over more than 20 years. I have
counseled Democratic members of Congress, as well as Republican trade
officials at USTR, including my former boss, Senator Portman. Before
that, in private practice, I counseled businesses that petitioned the
ITC for relief under the trade remedy laws, as well as businesses that
opposed relief. I have counseled exporters as well as importers.
I have been honored to serve as an advocate for these clients. I
now look forward to serving in a different role--not as an advocate,
but as an impartial, independent, and objective decision maker and
source of information and analysis.
If confirmed, I will administer the trade remedy laws fairly,
objectively, and in accordance with congressional intent. And I will
work with my fellow Commissioners to respond as fully and quickly as
possible to congressional and administration requests with the most
reliable information and independent and insightful analysis possible.
Thank you for your consideration.
______
SENATE FINANCE COMMITTEE
STATEMENT OF INFORMATION REQUESTED
OF NOMINEE
A. BIOGRAPHICAL INFORMATION
1. Name (include any former names used): Jason Edward Kearns.
2. Position to which nominated: Commissioner, U.S. International
Trade Commission.
3. Date of nomination: January 17, 2017.
4. Address (list current residence, office, and mailing addresses):
5. Date and place of birth: March 19, 1971; Denver, CO.
6. Marital status (include maiden name of wife or husband's name):
7. Names and ages of children:
8. Education (list secondary and higher education institutions, dates
attended, degree received, and date degree granted):
Weld Central High School (Keenesburg, CO), 1985-1989; high
school diploma 1989.
University of Pennsylvania, 1989; no degre--transferred.
University of Denver, 1990-1993; BA 1993.
University of Pennsylvania, 1993-96; JD 1996.
Harvard University, Kennedy School of Government (Harvard
Kennedy School), 1998-2000; MPP 2000.
9. Employment record (list all jobs held since college, including the
title or description of job, name of employer, location of work, and
dates of employment):
Chief International Trade Counsel (2012-Present) and
International Trade Counsel (2006-2012); Democratic Staff,
Committee on Ways and Means, U.S. House of Representatives,
Washington, DC 2006-2012.
Associate/Assistant General Counsel, Office of the U.S. Trade
Representative, Executive Office of the President, Washington,
DC 2003-2006.
Associate/Counsel, WilmerHale (formerly Wilmer, Cutler, and
Pickering), Washington, DC 2000-2003.
Intern, Appellate Body, World Trade Organization, Geneva,
Switzerland, summer 2000.
Intern, Office of the U.S. Trade Representative, Washington,
DC, summer 1999.
Associate, Mayer Brown, Chicago, IL and Bishkek, Kyrgyz
Republic, 1996-98.
Summer Associate, Mayer Brown, Chicago, IL, summer 1995.
Intern, U.S. District Court, Denver, CO, summer 1994.
10. Government experience (list any advisory, consultative, honorary,
or other part-time service or positions with Federal, State, or local
government, other than those listed above):
None, other than those listed above.
11. Business relationships (list all positions held as an officer,
director, trustee, partner, proprietor, agent, representative, or
consultant of any corporation, company, farm, partnership, other
business enterprise, or educational or other institution):
At law firms (WilmerHale and Mayer Brown), I served as attorney
(agent/consultant) to many client businesses. I do not have a
record of the clients I served.
12. Memberships (list all memberships and offices held in
professional, fraternal, scholarly, civic, business, charitable, and
other organizations):
Advisory board member, University of Denver, division of Arts,
Humanities, and Social Sciences.
Member of the District of Columbia bar.
Former member of the Illinois bar.
Member of the Chi Phi fraternity (University of Denver, Mu Zeta
chapter).
Member of the Phi Beta Kappa society.
13. Political affiliations and activities:
a. List all public offices for which you have been a candidate.
None.
b. List all memberships and offices held in and services rendered
to all political parties or election committees during the last 10
years.
Volunteer, Barack Obama presidential campaign, 2008.
c. Itemize all political contributions to any individual, campaign
organization, political party, political action committee, or similar
entity of $50 or more for the past 10 years.
Obama for America, June 2008, $1,000.
Obama for America, September 2008, $500.
Obama for America, October 2008, $250.
DCCC, October 2010, $200.
Obama Victory Fund, June 2012, $500.
Hillary for America, September 2015, $100.
Hillary for America, November 2015, $500.
Hillary Victory Fund, August 2016, $500.
ActBlue, DCCC-House Dems, August 2016, $300.
Hillary Victory Fund, September 2016, $200.
14. Honors and awards (list all scholarships, fellowships, honorary
degrees, honorary society memberships, military medals, and any other
special recognitions for outstanding service or achievement):
2013, University of Denver masters program scholar award, arts,
humanities, and social sciences.
Graduated University of Pennsylvania law school, cum laude,
1996.
Graduated University of Denver, BA, summa cum laude, 1993.
University of Denver honors scholarship, 1990-1993.
Phi Beta Kappa honorary society, 1992.
Dobro Slovo, Russian honorary society, 1993.
University of Denver, economics department student of the year,
1993.
15. Published writings (list the titles, publishers, and dates of all
books, articles, reports, or other published materials you have
written):
``The United States-Morocco Free Trade Agreement,'' in
Bilateral and Regional Free Trade Agreements, Vol. 2, pp. 144-
191, S. Lester and B. Mercurio, eds., Cambridge University
Press, 2009.
``Moving Forward: A New, Bipartisan Trade Policy That Reflect
American Values,'' on behalf of Charles B. Rangel, chairman of
the Committee on Ways and Means, 45(2) Harvard Journal on
Legislation 377 (2008).
``Adjudicating Compliance in the WTO: A Review of DSU Article
21.5,'' with Steve Charnovitz, 5(2) Journal of International
Economic Law 331 (2002), Oxford University Press.
``International Competition Policy and the GATS: A Proposal to
Address Market Access Limitations in the Distribution Services
Sector,'' 22 University of Pennsylvania Journal of
International Econonic Law 285 (2001).
16. Speeches (list all former speeches you have delivered during the
past 5 years which are on topics relevant to the position for which you
have been nominated):
I regularly meet with groups to discuss international trade
issues in my current job. But I have not delivered or prepared
formal speeches. When I speak to groups, my comments are almost
always off the record. The only exception I can think of is
when I spoke at the Cato Institute. There is no written record
of that discussion. The video is here:
http://www.cato.org/events/trans-pacific-partnership-race-
finish-or-long-slog-ahead.
17. Qualifications (state what, in your opinion, qualifies you to
serve in the position to which you have been nominated):
I believe my education and experience in international trade
law and policy (particularly as an attorney in trade remedy
proceedings before the ITC and other agencies and courts, as an
attorney in the Office of the General Counsel within the Office
of USTR, and as Chief International Trade Counsel to the
Committee on Ways and Means) qualify me to serve as a
Commissioner on the U.S. International Trade Commission.
B. FUTURE EMPLOYMENT RELATIONSHIPS
1. Will you sever all connections with your present employers,
business firms, associations, or organizations if you are confirmed by
the Senate? If not, provide details.
Yes, I will sever all connections with my present employer, and
any other significant connections that would create a conflict
of interest or an appearance of one.
2. Do you have any plans, commitments, or agreements to pursue
outside employment, with or without compensation, during your service
with the government? If so, provide details.
No. I have committed to serve on the University of Denver
advisory board for Arts, Humanities, and Social Sciences. My
work with that board is not compensated and, in my view,
creates no conflict with my work as an ITC Commissioner. But,
if deemed necessary by the Senate Finance Committee, I would
sever that relationship.
3. Has any person or entity made a commitment or agreement to employ
your services in any capacity after you leave government service? If
so, provide details.
No.
4. If you are confirmed by the Senate, do you expect to serve out
your full term or until the next presidential election, whichever is
applicable? If not, explain.
Yes.
C. POTENTIAL CONFLICTS OF INTEREST
1. Indicate any investments, obligations, liabilities, or other
relationships which could involve potential conflicts of interest in
the position to which you have been nominated.
The Office of Government Ethics and the International Trade
Commission have identified a number of assets (Qualcomm, Cisco
Systems, Intel Corp., Apple, Inc., Alphabet Inc., Nucor Corp.,
Baxter International, General Electric, Home Depot, Oracle, NXP
Semiconductors, Precision Castparts, Nike, Exxon Mobil, and
Berkshire Hathaway) that create potential conflicts of
interest. I have agreed in writing that, within 3 months of my
confirmation, I will divest my interests in those entities.
2. Describe any business relationship, dealing, or financial
transaction which you have had during the last 10 years, whether for
yourself, on behalf of a client, or acting as an agent, that could in
any way constitute or result in a possible conflict of interest in the
position to which you have been nominated.
None. For the past 10 years, I have worked in the House of
Representatives, which ITC staff sometimes refers to as a
``customer'' or ``client'' of the ITC.
3. Describe any activity during the past 10 years in which you have
engaged for the purpose of directly or indirectly influencing the
passage, defeat, or modification of any legislation or affecting the
administration and execution of law or public policy. Activities
performed as an employee of the Federal Government need not be listed.
None.
4. Explain how you will resolve any potential conflict of interest,
including any that may be disclosed by your responses to the above
items.
I would either sever my relationship or investment interest
that creates the conflict, or would recuse myself from any
matter involving the conflict.
5. Two copies of written opinions should be provided directly to the
committee by the designated agency ethics officer of the agency to
which you have been nominated and by the Office of Government Ethics
concerning potential conflicts of interest or any legal impediments to
your serving in this position.
D. LEGAL AND OTHER MATTERS
1. Have you ever been the subject of a complaint or been
investigated, disciplined, or otherwise cited for a breach of ethics
for unprofessional conduct before my court, administrative agency,
professional association, disciplinary committee, or other professional
group? If so, provide details.
No.
2. Have you ever been investigated, arrested, charged, or held by any
Federal, State, or other law enforcement authority for a violation of
any Federal, State, county, or municipal law, regulation, or ordinance,
other than a minor traffic offense? If so, provide details.
No.
3. Have you ever been involved as a party in interest in any
administrative agency proceeding or civil litigation? If so, provide
details.
No.
4. Have you ever been convicted (including pleas of guilty or nolo
contendere) of any criminal violation other than a minor traffic
offense? If so, provide details.
No.
5. Please advise the committee of any additional information,
favorable or unfavorable, which you feel should be considered in
connection with your nomination.
I have no further information.
E. TESTIFYING BEFORE CONGRESS
1. If you are confirmed by the Senate, are you willing to appear and
testify before any duly constituted committee of the Congress on such
occasions as you may be reasonably requested to do so?
Yes.
2. If you are confirmed by the Senate, are you willing to provide
such information as is requested by such committees?
Yes, I am willing to comply with any reasonable request by any
committee.
______
Questions Submitted for the Record to Jason Kearns
Question Submitted by Hon. Ron Wyden
Question. In 2015, Congress amended the definition of material
injury and the factors the ITC examines in evaluating injury to
prohibit the ITC from finding that there has been no injury ``merely
because that industry is profitable or because the performance of that
industry has recently improved.'' For a range of industries--including
softwood lumber, solar, and steel producers--profitability or other
positive performance indicators may mask harms from unfair trade that
have profound consequences for companies' ability to compete. For
example, a company that is unable to make long-term capital
improvements due to unfairly priced imports should not be denied relief
merely because it is profitable.
Do you agree that a domestic industry may suffer material injury
from dumped and subsidized imports even though it manages to remain
profitable or its performance has improved? Do you agree that there are
circumstances in which the Commission could find material injury where
an industry would have done better, but for dumped and subsidized
imports?
Answer. I am aware that 19 U.S.C. 1677(7)(J), which was added to
the statute in 2015, states that the Commission may not make a negative
determination merely because the domestic industry is profitable or
because its performance has recently improved. If confirmed, I commit
to strictly enforcing the statute and to consider all the relevant
statutory factors when making determinations in antidumping and
countervailing duty investigations.
______
Questions Submitted by Hon. Debbie Stabenow
Question. Michigan is home to the cherry capital of the world, but
a flood of cheap imports of tart cherry juice concentrate from Turkey,
Poland, and Hungary is threatening to put U.S. cherry producers out of
business.
If confirmed, will you look into this matter and consider self-
initiating a section 332 investigation into market conditions for U.S.
tart cherry juice concentrate and imports from Turkey, Poland, and
Hungary?
Similarly, Michigan asparagus growers have been struggling with
dumping from Mexico and Peru for several years.
If confirmed, will you look into this matter and consider self-
initiating a section 332 investigation into market conditions for U.S.
asparagus and imports from Mexico and Peru?
Answer. I have discussed with Commission staff your concerns with
imports of tart cherry juice concentrate and asparagus, and the impact
those imports have on U.S. cherry and asparagus producers. Your
concerns, and the recent growth of imports of these products, are known
to analysts at the Commission. And, in the past, the Commission has
provided trade data to members of Congress upon request. If confirmed,
I will work to ensure that Commission staff continue to respond to
requests for trade data from Congress.
In addition to such assistance, section 332 of the Tariff Act of
1930 requires the Commission to initiate investigations and issue
reports when requested to do so by the President of the United States,
the Committee on Ways and Means of the House of Representatives, the
Committee on Finance of the Senate, or by either branch of the
Congress. Recent examples of investigations covering global
agricultural competitiveness include, ``Rice: Global Competitiveness of
the U.S. Industry, Investigation No. 332-549, USITC Publication 4530,
April 2015,'' and ``Olive Oil: Conditions of Competition between U.S.
and Major Foreign Supplier Industries Investigation No. 332-537, USITC
Publication 4419, August 2013.'' The House Committee on Ways and Means
requested both of these investigations. Were the Commission to receive
such a request regarding cherries or asparagus, if confirmed as a
Commissioner, I would work with my fellow Commissioners and USITC staff
to ensure that the Commission provides a thoughtful and robust report
that is timely and responsive.
Finally, as you know, the Commission also has the authority to
self-initiate investigations under section 332. Given its budget and
resource constraints, and the fact that the Committees and USTR are in
the best position to determine the information and advice that they
need to develop policy, the Commission has rarely exercised this
authority. If confirmed, I will work with my fellow Commissioners and
USITC staff to ensure that the Commission exercises this authority
appropriately.
______
Question Submitted by Hon. Robert Menendez
Question. Thank you for your answer to my question at the hearing
regarding ITC consideration of end user submissions.
To follow up on that discussion, if purchasers and end users tell
the ITC that the U.S.-produced product is very different than the
imported product, but U.S. producers argue that they are the same, how
does the Commission reconcile those two views?
Answer. This is one of several issues on which the Commission
collects information during the course of an antidumping or
countervailing duty investigation. The record that the Commission will
compile includes questionnaire responses from marketplace participants
such as U.S. producers, importers, and purchasers; written submissions
by parties, which will typically include U.S. producers, importers,
purchasers, and exporters; and hearing and conference testimony. As a
Commissioner, I will carefully consider all information in the record
before making any factual findings on disputed issues.
______
Questions Submitted by Hon. Sherrod Brown
Question. My legislation, the Leveling the Playing Field Act,
became law in 2015--thanks to the support of Ranking Member Wyden,
Chairman Hatch, Senator Portman, and many others on the Senate Finance
Committee. Congress passed the Leveling the Playing Field Act to make
sure U.S. trade remedy laws continue to provide meaningful relief for
U.S. companies and workers that are injured by unfair trade practices.
Oftentimes our trade remedy laws are the only way American companies
and workers can get any relief from trade cheats. As a Commissioner on
the ITC, you will be responsible for implementing the Leveling the
Playing Field Act.
Will you commit, if confirmed, to fully enforcing that law, and all
of title 7, as Congress intended?
Answer. Yes. If confirmed, I commit to strictly and fully enforcing
all provisions of title VII, including the Leveling the Playing Field
Act, consistent with the statutory language and expressed congressional
intent. These laws provide a vital tool for U.S. companies that are
faced with unfair import competition, and the ITC's decisions can
impact the livelihoods of workers, farmers, and businesses across
America. The ITC is charged with the responsibility of conducting trade
remedy investigations and making determinations based on the facts in
the record of the investigation and the law as enacted by Congress. In
making determinations under these laws, I can assure you that I will
make my determinations independently and objectively based on the facts
in the record and the applicable law.
Question. Specifically, do you agree that it is possible for a
domestic industry to suffer material injury from dumped or subsidized
imports even if its profits have grown or its market performance has
improved?
Answer. Yes. I am aware that 19 U.S.C. 1677(7)(J), which was added
to the statute by the Leveling the Playing Field Act, states that the
Commission may not make a negative determination merely because the
domestic industry is profitable or because its performance has recently
improved. If confirmed, I commit to strictly enforcing the statute and
consider all the relevant statutory factors when making determinations
in antidumping and countervailing duty investigations.
Question. Foreign producers can undermine the effectiveness of U.S.
trade remedy laws by exporting large volumes of product into the U.S.
before a preliminary determination in a trade remedy case is issued. Do
you believe existing U.S. trade remedy laws and ITC methodologies
adequately address these duty evasion tactics?
Answer. I am aware that the statute provides a mechanism permitting
the Department of Commerce to issue retroactive antidumping or
countervailing duties when there have been massive imports of
merchandise over a relatively short period, such as prior to issuance
of its preliminary determination, and the Commission makes a finding
that these imports are likely to undermine seriously the remedial
effect of any antidumping or countervailing duty order. If confirmed, I
commit to fully enforce these provisions on critical circumstances, as
well as all provisions of title VII.
______
Prepared Statement of Hon. Ron Wyden,
a U.S. Senator From Oregon
Today, the committee is considering the nominations of three
nominees for critical trade positions: Mr. Jeffrey Gerrish to be deputy
United States trade representative, Mr. Gregory Doud to be chief
agricultural negotiator at USTR, and Mr. Jason Kearns to be a member of
the United States International Trade Commission.
I want to start with a serious matter with respect to Mr. Gerrish's
nomination. As I understand the facts, Mr. Gerrish moved residences
from Virginia to Maryland in June of last year. Though he no longer
lived in Virginia, he voted there in the 2016 general election.
Virginia provides a 30-day grace period to former residents. This was
way outside what the law allows. Now, I have a hard time understanding
how an attorney as accomplished as Mr. Gerrish can walk out of his
house in Maryland, travel all the way to Virginia and cast his vote in
that State without thinking there may be an issue. You obviously can't
flash a Maryland driver's license when a Virginia polling place worker
asks where you live. This seems to me to be a serious error in
judgement on a part of the law that's pretty unambiguous. As of now,
it's especially noteworthy that the Republican and the Democratic
member of the Fairfax County Electoral Board have called for an
investigation by the prosecutor in this case. The issues a deputy USTR
has to deal with on a daily basis are a lot more complicated than
voting.
And there's another reason why this issue just takes my breath
away. This administration has fabricated out of thin air a crisis of
widespread voter fraud in this country without one shred of evidence to
back up their claims. They've launched a so-called Commission on
Election Integrity, which looks a lot to me like an attempt to justify
taking the vote away from millions of American citizens, particularly
black and Latino citizens. Bottom line, the administration makes
illegal voting out to be widespread and far reaching, almost an
existential threat to the country, and here they are nominating someone
who appears to have cast an illegal vote in a highly contested State.
I would say it boggles the mind, but the fact is, there's hypocrisy
as far as the eye can see in this administration. They're all about
belt tightening and budget cuts, but every day there's a new story
about a cabinet official or aide jetting around the country in a cushy
private plane. Senior White House officials have reportedly used
private emails hosted on private servers for official business. It
sounds like the head of the EPA doesn't eat a meal or take a meeting
unless it's with some industry insider right out of the swamp. With all
that, perhaps it should be no surprise that the Trump team is willing
to look the other way on illegal voting when it comes to their own
nominee.
Turning to the critical trade challenges that are facing us today,
after hearing a lot of tough talk on trade, the administration has
disappointed. In April the President ordered the launch of
investigations into steel and aluminum imports. He called it an
historic day, but so far, it's been an historic blunder.
Failing to follow through on this tough talk has led to steel
imports jumping by 21 percent. You're seeing the same pattern in
softwood lumber after the administration delayed imposing duties on
unfairly traded imports from Canada. This is having a real impact on
the United States and red-white-and-blue jobs. By the President's own
preferred metric--the trade deficit--the United States is worse off
this year. The deficit rose by about 28 billion dollars in the first 7
months of 2017.
This administration has also produced disappointing results in its
engagement with China. Although administration officials touted a
limited deal with China in late spring, labeling something a good deal
is very different from actually getting a good deal. The United States
has serious and far-reaching trade issues with China, including with
respect to cloud computing, and again, what's needed isn't more talk.
What's needed is a concrete strategy.
I also have concerns about where the NAFTA renegotiations are
heading. As I'm sure Mr. Doud can attest, trade is complicated.
Entering into trade agreements may create winners and losers, but so
does withdrawing from them, or fundamentally changing their nature.
There are lots of farm and manufacturing jobs that depend on existing
relationships, and the goal should be to improve those relationships
for everyone. It'd be a big mistake to leave whole sectors of our
economy behind.
I worry that this is a trade policy built on hostage-taking and
headlines, not the hard work of getting trade done right through tough
enforcement and a comprehensive strategy to open up markets for the
American-made brand.
Finally, Mr. Jason Kearns has been nominated to serve on the
International Trade Commission. Those of us who've had the opportunity
to work with Mr. Kearns here on Capitol Hill know that he understands
the ins and outs of this country's trade policy as well as anybody. I'm
confident that he's committed to policies that pay off for American
workers and communities, so I look forward to supporting his
nomination.
[all]