House Minority Leader Calls for Revocation of China’s Trade Status

For the first time in six years, House Minority Leader Richard A. Gephardt (D-Mo.) came out Friday for outright revocation of China’s most-favored-nation trade benefits, providing the clearest sign yet of how Congress is becoming increasingly divided over the issue.

The House’s Democratic leader is now squarely in opposition to the core of President Clinton’s China policy. Since 1994, Clinton has favored unconditional renewal of China’s most-favored-nation trade status, which permits Chinese goods to be imported into the United States with the same low tariffs enjoyed by nearly all other nations.

Congress first embarked in 1990 on what has become an annual debate over whether and how to renew China’s trade benefits. For the last five years, Gephardt had favored less drastic approaches than revocation--such as granting China an extension of the benefits but with conditions attached to further renewals.

However, in a letter to Secretary of State Warren Christopher released Friday, Gephardt said he has concluded that “the Chinese are not responding in a meaningful way” to American complaints over trade, human rights and the proliferation of dangerous weapons.

“This year . . . the entirety and enormity of China’s actions have led me to embrace a more aggressive approach,” he said. “Moreover, our nation’s business community and others have refused to support alternative strategies to MFN revocation that establish a clear and direct linkage between trade and our other vital national priorities.”

Gephardt is the highest-ranking of several House members who have announced that they are supporting revocation for the first time this year. Among the others is Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D-San Francisco), who until this year had been a principal sponsor of legislation aimed at extending China’s trade benefits--but with conditions.

The decision by the House minority leader does not necessarily mean that China’s trade benefits are in trouble. In fact, most analysts believe that the benefits will be extended again this year without any conditions because there are not enough votes in the Senate to change the status quo.

Even if the House and Senate were to vote to revoke or restrict China’s trade benefits, Clinton would almost certainly veto the measure. That veto could only be overridden by a two-thirds vote in both houses of Congress. Both opponents and supporters of China’s most-favored-nation status say it is clear that more than one-third of the members of the Senate will vote for unconditional extension this year.

However, Gephardt’s action demonstrates that efforts to find a compromise or middle ground on China policy may be slipping away.

There are now some top congressional leaders in both the Republican and Democratic parties who favor revocation of China’s trade privileges. In the past, only a relatively small number of legislators, primarily Republicans, supported such action.

Clinton earlier this month extended China’s benefits unconditionally for another year, and his action will take effect unless Congress moves to revoke the benefits. The issue may be brought to a vote in the House within the next week or two.

Some members of Congress are still pressing for legislation to extend China’s benefits with conditions attached.

Last month, Rep. Christopher Cox (R-Newport Beach) introduced legislation granting China a renewal of its trade benefits if the president certifies that the United States supports Taiwan’s prompt entry into the World Trade Organization and opposes any immediate admission of China.