Category: Press Releases and Statements

Visa Backlog Costs U.S. Exporters More than $30 Billion Since 2002, New Study Finds

Posted on by dcadmin

Business Groups Say Current Visa Delays
Severely Damage U.S. Companies, Foreign Policy

Washington, DC – Persistent problems in government handling of visas for foreign business travelers have cost U.S. exporters more than $30 billion in revenue and indirect costs since July 2002, according to a study released today by eight U.S. international business groups. The study surveyed a diverse group of small, medium and large companies from across the spectrum of U.S. industries, including technology, health care, pharmaceuticals, retail, energy, automobile, publishing, engineering/construction, airlines and financial institutions. The survey findings indicate that, though a wide range of U.S. businesses have been financially affected by visa backlogs, small to medium-sized exporters experience disproportionately severe losses.

“The effects of losing over $30 billion throughout our economy as a result of inefficient management of the visa processing system are staggering,” said Bill Reinsch, President of the National Foreign Trade Council. “Our companies have expressed growing frustration to government officials and Congress for nearly two years over the broken business visa system, to no avail. Now that we have measured the costs, the results are clear: the U.S. cannot continue on this course. When legitimate foreign business executives and vital international customers cannot enter the U.S. to conduct normal business, it is our companies, our workers, our economy and our international relations that pay the price.”

The survey data was gathered and analyzed by The Santangelo Group, an independent research firm, on behalf of the Aerospace Industries Association (AIA), the American Council on International Personnel (ACIP), the Association for Manufacturing and Technology (AMT), the Coalition for Employment Through Exports (CEE), the National Foreign Trade Council (NFTC), the US-China Business Council (USCBC), the U.S.-Russia Business Council (USRBC) and the U.S.-Vietnam Trade Council (USVTC).

Companies responding to the survey enumerated the financial impact of the visa backlog in two categories: revenue loss and indirect expenses. Statistical analysis indicates that the impact on all U.S. exporters would total more than $30 billion.

Of the companies sampled:

  • 73% currently experience, or have recently experienced, problems in the processing of business travel visas (including unexpected delays and arbitrary denials)
  • 60% reported they had suffered a “material impact” from business travel visa processing delays, including lost sales, increased costs, need to relocate people or functions offshore, etc.
  • 51% report that the visa process is worse today than it was one year ago

The survey concluded that the financial impact of visa delays hits medium-sized companies the hardest, directly contributing to 54% of total revenue losses and 65% of total indirect costs.

“While tighter visa restrictions were put in place with the best of intentions, the restrictions’ negative impact on both our economy and our trade deficit cannot be ignored,” said Ed Rice, President of the Coalition for Employment through Exports. “In fact, our report shows that the losses resulting from visa delays go well beyond lost revenues, with the unexplained and arbitrary denials escalating to cost U.S. companies much more. Key contracts and projects will go elsewhere; U.S. companies will increasingly move research and other facilities overseas; and, perhaps most troubling for the American entrepreneur, U.S. small businesses will pull back from international business development for fear that visa red tape will pose unmanageable obstacles.”

RECOMMENDATIONS

  • The goal for visa processing should be 48 hours with an outside limit of 30 days;
  • Consular posts should provide greater transparency to U.S. companies;
  • A “Gold Card” program would facilitate visa applications and avoid problems and redundancies before they occur;
  • Continued integration of government databases is essential;
  • Multiple-entry, longer duration visas would lessen consular workloads;
  • Consular posts should allow interviews to be scheduled over the Internet;
  • Congress should exercise its oversight authority to ensure improvements in consular services.

“There are ways to make the visa system more efficient and transparent without compromising our need for a secure America. Let’s provide a level playing field for U.S. companies to compete, just as we have before. To remain competitive in the global marketplace, we cannot afford more losses due to a visa system that is overwhelmed,” concluded Lynn Shotwell, Legal Counsel and Director of Government Relations, American Council on International Personnel.

A full copy of the visa survey is available at http://www.nftc.org/default/visasurveyresults%20final.pdf and to view the “Recommendations for Ameliorating Impact of Visa Delays” go to http://www.nftc.org/default/visasurveyrecommendations%20604.pdf

 

The American Council on International Personnel, Inc. (www.acip.com) is a leading not-for-profit professional association dedicated to facilitating the international movement of personnel. Founded in 1972, ACIP is committed to maintaining its position as the preeminent voice on issues affecting the mobility of highly educated professionals across international borders for its over 250 corporate and institutional members.

 

The National Foreign Trade Council (www.nftc.org) is a leading business organization advocating an open, rules-based global trading system. Founded in 1914 by a broad-based group of American companies, the NFTC now serves 300 member companies through its offices in Washington and New York.

The US-China Business Council is the principal organization of US corporations engaged in business relations with the People’s Republic of China. Founded in 1973, the Council serves several hundred leading US companies from its Washington, DC headquarters and field offices in Beijing and Shanghai.

The U.S.-Russia Business Council (USRBC) is a Washington-based trade association that represents the interests of 300 member companies operating in the Russian market. The Council’s mission is to expand and enhance the U.S.-Russian commercial relationship. Guided by member interests, the Council promotes an economic environment in which businesses can succeed in a challenging Russian market. Through a range of activities, the Council contributes to the stability and development of a free market in Russia and supports Russia’s integration into the global economy. For more information, please visit www.usrbc.org.

The Santangelo Group is an international business and economic development consulting firm based in Washington, DC, comprised of former U.S. government officials and Fortune 500 executives. More information about the firm is available at www.SantangeloGroup.com.

Visa Backlog Costs U.S. Exporters More than $30 Billion Since 2002, New Study Finds

Posted on by dcadmin

Business Groups Say Current Visa Delays
Severely Damage U.S. Companies, Foreign Policy

Washington, DC – Persistent problems in government handling of visas for foreign business travelers have cost U.S. exporters more than $30 billion in revenue and indirect costs since July 2002, according to a study released today by eight U.S. international business groups. The study surveyed a diverse group of small, medium and large companies from across the spectrum of U.S. industries, including technology, health care, pharmaceuticals, retail, energy, automobile, publishing, engineering/construction, airlines and financial institutions. The survey findings indicate that, though a wide range of U.S. businesses have been financially affected by visa backlogs, small to medium-sized exporters experience disproportionately severe losses.

“The effects of losing over $30 billion throughout our economy as a result of inefficient management of the visa processing system are staggering,” said Bill Reinsch, President of the National Foreign Trade Council.  “Our companies have expressed growing frustration to government officials and Congress for nearly two years over the broken business visa system, to no avail.  Now that we have measured the costs, the results are clear:  the U.S. cannot continue on this course.  When legitimate foreign business executives and vital international customers cannot enter the U.S. to conduct normal business, it is our companies, our workers, our economy and our international relations that pay the price.”

The survey data was gathered and analyzed by The Santangelo Group, an independent research firm, on behalf of the Aerospace Industries Association (AIA), the American Council on International Personnel (ACIP), the Association for Manufacturing and Technology (AMT), the Coalition for Employment Through Exports (CEE), the National Foreign Trade Council (NFTC), the US-China Business Council (USCBC), the U.S.-Russia Business Council (USRBC) and the U.S.-Vietnam Trade Council (USVTC).

Companies responding to the survey enumerated the financial impact of the visa backlog in two categories: revenue loss and indirect expenses.  Statistical analysis indicates that the impact on all U.S. exporters would total more than $30 billion.

Of the companies sampled:

  • 73% currently experience, or have recently experienced, problems in the processing of business travel visas (including unexpected delays and arbitrary denials)
  • 60% reported they had suffered a “material impact” from business travel visa processing delays, including lost sales, increased costs, need to relocate people or functions offshore, etc.
  • 51% report that the visa process is worse today than it was one year ago

The survey concluded that the financial impact of visa delays hits medium-sized companies the hardest, directly contributing to 54% of total revenue losses and 65% of total indirect costs.

“While tighter visa restrictions were put in place with the best of intentions, the restrictions’ negative impact on both our economy and our trade deficit cannot be ignored,” said Ed Rice, President of the Coalition for Employment through Exports.  “In fact, our report shows that the losses resulting from visa delays go well beyond lost revenues, with the unexplained and arbitrary denials escalating to cost U.S. companies much more.  Key contracts and projects will go elsewhere; U.S. companies will increasingly move research and other facilities overseas; and, perhaps most troubling for the American entrepreneur, U.S. small businesses will pull back from international business development for fear that visa red tape will pose unmanageable obstacles.”

RECOMMENDATIONS

  • The goal for visa processing should be 48 hours with an outside limit of 30 days;
  • Consular posts should provide greater transparency to U.S. companies;
  • A “Gold Card” program would facilitate visa applications and avoid problems and redundancies before they occur;
  • Continued integration of government databases is essential;
  • Multiple-entry, longer duration visas would lessen consular workloads;
  • Consular posts should allow interviews to be scheduled over the Internet;
  • Congress should exercise its oversight authority to ensure improvements in consular services.

“There are ways to make the visa system more efficient and transparent without compromising our need for a secure America.  Let’s provide a level playing field for U.S. companies to compete, just as we have before.  To remain competitive in the global marketplace, we cannot afford more losses due to a visa system that is overwhelmed,” concluded Lynn Shotwell, Legal Counsel and Director of Government Relations, American Council on International Personnel.

A full copy of the visa survey is available at http://www.nftc.org/default/visasurveyresults%20final.pdf and to view the “Recommendations for Ameliorating Impact of Visa Delays” go to http://www.nftc.org/default/visasurveyrecommendations%20604.pdf 

 

The American Council on International Personnel, Inc. (www.acip.com) is a leading not-for-profit professional association dedicated to facilitating the international movement of personnel.  Founded in 1972, ACIP is committed to maintaining its position as the preeminent voice on issues affecting the mobility of highly educated professionals across international borders for its over 250 corporate and institutional members.

The National Foreign Trade Council (www.nftc.org) is a leading business organization advocating an open, rules-based global trading system. Founded in 1914 by a broad-based group of American companies, the NFTC now serves 300 member companies through its offices in Washington and New York.

The US-China Business Council is the principal organization of US corporations engaged in business relations with the People’s Republic of China.  Founded in 1973, the Council serves several hundred leading US companies from its Washington, DC headquarters and field offices in Beijing and Shanghai.

The U.S.-Russia Business Council (USRBC) is a Washington-based trade association that represents the interests of 300 member companies operating in the Russian market.  The Council’s mission is to expand and enhance the U.S.-Russian commercial relationship.  Guided by member interests, the Council promotes an economic environment in which businesses can succeed in a challenging Russian market.  Through a range of activities, the Council contributes to the stability and development of a free market in Russia and supports Russia’s integration into the global economy.  For more information, please visit www.usrbc.org.

The Santangelo Group is an international business and economic development consulting firm based in Washington, DC, comprised of former U.S. government officials and Fortune 500 executives.  More information about the firm is available at www.SantangeloGroup.com. 

NFTC Praises Newly-Signed U.S.-Central America FTA

Posted on by dcadmin

Washington, DC – NFTC officials today applauded the signing of the U.S.-Central America Free Trade Agreement, calling it an historic building block in strengthening the economic and trade relationship between the United States and Central America.  The CAFTA will also help raise living standards and strengthen democracy in a region of strategic proximity and importance to the U.S.

“The U.S.-Central America FTA will open up significant economic opportunities and boost economic  growth in all of our countries,” said Mary Irace, Vice President of the National Foreign Trade Council.  “The high standards set by this agreement will eliminate barriers to trade across-the-board, strengthen close economic and trade ties between the United States and its Central American neighbors, and serve as an impetus for a high-standard Free Trade Area of the Americas.”

Provisions of the new FTA include strong intellectual property rights protection and industrial market access.  Additionally, the innovative capacity-building chapter will boost Central America’s ability to implement its commitments and benefit fully under the FTA. 

With President Bush announcing intentions in 2002 to pursue an FTA with Central America, talks began in earnest in January 2003.  U.S. exports to the Central American governments of El Salvador, Guatemala, Honduras and Nicaragua were valued at $9 billion in 2001, almost equal to U.S. exports to Russia, India and Indonesia combined.  In addition, 78% of those exporters to Central America are small businesses.

“With the U.S.-Central America FTA, U.S. small and large businesses, workers, farmers and consumers stand to gain from greater trade with Central America. The same is true for our Central American neighbors.  This is a fine example of sustaining regional and economic stability through more transparent, open trade relations.  We hope the momentum from today’s signing will aide in the swift, thorough completion of future FTA negotiations,” stated Irace.

NFTC Paper Examines Impact of EU Environmental Agenda

Posted on by dcadmin

Cautions that EU attempts at ‘enlightened’ environmentalism impede economic growth,

social welfare and public health in developing countries

Washington DC – Obscured by its passionate appeals for safety and global stewardship, the EU’s persistent attempts to apply the Precautionary Principle hurt developing countries’ prospects for economic growth, poverty alleviation, social advancement and even environmental protection, according to the most recent of the National Foreign Trade Council’s white papers on precaution and trade, which  presents three compelling cases that illustrate this situation.

 The paper, ‘Enlightened’ Environmentalism or Disguised Protectionism?  Assessing the Impact of EU Precaution-Based Standards on Developing Countries, offers powerful evidence of the danger and inequity of indiscriminately applying developed nation safety and environmental protection standards to the developing world.

“The three cases outlined in this paper show the conflict that arises between the EU’s precaution-based agenda and the Doha Ministerial Declaration,” said NFTC President Bill Reinsch.  “Doha has a goal of securing for the least developed countries a share in world trade commensurate with their economic development needs.  This goal, as well as the health and environmental protections goals all nations share cannot be achieved if developing countries are saddled with unattainable standards that block their products from EU markets.  Nor can they be achieved if developing economies and industries are denied access to important technologies.”

This most recent NFTC white paper contains three essays with regional implications:

  • Africa — A discussion of the Stockholm Convention on Persistent Organic Pollutants (POPs) and how it adversely impacts the health of millions of Sub-Saharan Africans by effectively banning the use of DDT as part of a comprehensive malaria control program.

  • Asia — An outline of the impact of the Basel Convention’s broad definition of ‘hazardous waste’ and its proposed Ban Amendment on important recovery and recycling industries in Asia. 
  • Latin America and Asia – A presentation of the extra-territorial scope of the EU-REACH Regulation on chemicals and how it threatens the local and global competitiveness of key industries that produce or use chemicals within a number of Asian and Latin American countries.

Two earlier papers in the NFTC series present numerous examples of the EU’s use of precaution to block trade in a wide variety of products ranging from beef to computers.  They also clearly show how the EU has sought to inject the precautionary principle into the WTO system, international standards setting bodies, and bilateral and regional free trade and aid agreements.

  

Reinsch urged representatives of the developing nations to pay particular attention to this third report.  “Many developing countries lack the resources necessary to monitor and comply with the waves of overly stringent health, safety, and environmental regulations and standards being developed.  It’s tempting for them to agree to such rules when the perceived reward is trade and aid agreements or capacity building initiatives.  But, caution not precaution is what is needed.  The development of strong rules to protect health and environment is an important goal for both developed and developing nations, but both are best served – and those goals are best met — by regulatory schemes that also promote economic development, not restrict trade and the growth and jobs it promotes.”

For a copy of the full NFTC paper, please see the NFTC’s website at http://www.nftc.org/default/white%20paper/riskreg3study404_2_Final.pdf. For a copy of the executive summary go to http://www.nftc.org/default/white%20paper/riskreg3execsum2Final404.pdf

 

The National Foreign Trade Council is a leading business organization advocating an open, rules-based global trading system. Founded in 1914 by a broad-based group of American companies, the NFTC now serves 300 member companies through its offices in Washington and New York.

 

NFTC Disappointed at Senate Passage of Outsourcing Amendment

Posted on by dcadmin

Washington, DC – The National Foreign Trade Council (NFTC) today expressed disappointment at the Senate’s action on March 4 in passing an amendment sponsored by Senator Christopher Dodd (D-CT) that would prohibit the performance of any part of any U.S. government contract at an overseas location and restrict federal financial assistance to states unless a state certifies that none of the contract work using federal funds will be performed offshore. 

 

“Even though the amendment was modified to limit its impact, we believe its message that the United States is going to build new walls around our economy is the wrong one,” said Bill Reinsch, president of the National Foreign Trade Council.  “We appreciate Senator Dodd’s motivation – to protect government contracts and domestic workers – but if fully implemented the amendment would complicate our foreign relations, discourage U.S. innovation, and ultimately cost more jobs than it would save.  Offshore outsourcing is an issue that demands careful and thoughtful debate and consideration, and there are many steps the United States could take to address it.  Erecting more barriers to commerce, trade, and investment, however, is not one of them.”

 

Modifications to the Dodd amendment include giving Cabinet agency heads, along with the President, power to decide which contracts are not subject to restrictions due to national security, or due to the availability of resources for the contract only outside the U.S.  Another modification includes a certification from the Secretary of Commerce that the contract would not contribute to a loss of U.S. jobs or that it would not hamper the U.S. economy.  While the provisions attempt to address the complexity of the outsourcing issue, Reinsch contends that they still fall short in repairing the damaging affects the Dodd amendment will have if it remains in the bill.

 

“Naturally, lawmakers and policy makers are concerned with the ramifications of outsourcing on the American worker.  However, tacking on shortsighted, ‘band-aid’ legislation to treat symptoms will only stunt our growth in the long-term.  A better course of action is to remain open to the economic promise of the rest of the world, allowing U.S. businesses to share ideas, technologies and opportunities with their foreign counterparts,” Reinsch concluded.

 

The National Foreign Trade Council is a leading business organization advocating an open, rules-based global trading system. Founded in 1914 by a broad-based group of American companies, the NFTC now serves 300 member companies through its offices in Washington and New York.

 

Statement Of The National Foreign Trade Council Board Of Directors On Offshore Outsourcing

Posted on by dcadmin

 

The National Foreign Trade Council Board of Directors notes the growing controversy in theUnited States over the movement of jobs offshore. The Board does not view this as a new phenomenon but rather as a continuation of a forty-year trend of global integration that has provided net benefits to the U.S. economy. What is new is that the offshore outsourcing of jobs has moved beyond the manufacturing sector into a growing variety of service sectors, particularly information technology.

The National Foreign Trade Council views this trend as an inevitable component of growing global economic integration. American companies are under increasing competitive pressure to cut costs and improve productivity, and in many cases one way to do that is to transfer some functions outside the United States. While this produces some job reductions here, it also has other, beneficial effects – more competitive companies, lower-priced goods and services for American consumers, and, to the extent offshore outsourcing is part of an overall foreign investment strategy, job creation as well.

These gains, however, are long term and diffuse while the losses tend to be short term and specific. The result is the public controversy we are now experiencing. It is the Council’s position that attempting to stop or limit offshore outsourcing would be counter-productive. It would make our companies less competitive and, as a result, would ultimately cost us even more jobs.

A wiser approach is to adjust the circumstances that lead to offshore outsourcing and deal with the immediate consequences for those that are dislocated. To that end, we support a four part approach:

1) Life-long learning; adjustment assistance.

While there is substantial evidence that foreign trade and investment produce more jobs and growth here as well as elsewhere, it is no secret that the new jobs trade creates are rarely taken by the same people who have lost theirs as a result of trade.

Government policy should address the needs of two groups:

  • Those who have lost their jobs and have limited opportunities for reemployment because their relevant skills are limited and/or their communities provide few opportunities.
  • The next generation of workers – our children – who will confront a working environment that will require more sophisticated skills and more agility and flexibility than any preceding generation has confronted.

To address these needs, we support expansion of the existing trade adjustment assistance program, including covering service workers, and we urge Congress and the Administration to devote more resources to education, particularly in math, science and engineering, and training to better equip future generations with the tools they need to deal with the rapidly changing work environment.

2) Incentives to stay here.

The reasons companies move off shore are largely economic. The creation of a more business-friendly climate here in the United States could alter the calculations companies make and lead to more decisions to maintain facilities here. A number of proposals are pending in the Congress in the tax and regulatory reform areas that could be helpful. In the tax area, we favor legislation that will provide tax relief to businesses in ways that enhance their competitiveness but do not discriminate between companies that operate primarily in the U.S. and those that have substantial foreign operations. Our tax laws should not disadvantage U.S. companies competing in the international marketplace. We also support Congressional action on tort reform and class action litigation in order to gain better control of onshore companies’ rapidly growing litigation costs.

3) Staying ahead.

America‘s strength has always been innovation – our originality coupled with our ability to run faster and stay ahead of our competition. Many of the innovations that have made America the world’s technology leader began with government support, often coming from the Department of Defense. We endorse public policies that encourage innovation, including expanded government support for R&D that will create new, job-providing industries in biotechnology, nanotechnology, and other sectors we have not even contemplated. We also endorse the President’s manufacturing initiative and urge full funding of the proposals contained in that plan.

4) Forward-looking US trade policy.

The U.S. remains one of the most globally competitive economies worldwide. Two central factors are behind this strength: the openness of our economy to international trade and investment and a trade policy that maintains open markets and advances open, rules-based trade in markets overseas through ongoing trade liberalization efforts. It is essential that the US continue to lead in opening markets and establishing transparent, non-discriminatory rules to govern trade and investment. To that end, we reaffirm our support for the Doha round of multilateral trade negotiations as well as for high quality bilateral and regional free trade agreements.

Taken together, we believe these approaches are an effective way to deal with offshore outsourcing constructively as an inevitable consequence of the global economic integration that has been instrumental in our country’s economic growth. We urge Congress and the Administration to consider these approaches and to avoid short-sighted protectionist responses.

Statement Of The National Foreign Trade Council Board Of Directors On Offshore Outsourcing

Posted on by dcadmin

The National Foreign Trade Council Board of Directors notes the growing controversy in theUnited States over the movement of jobs offshore.  The Board does not view this as a new phenomenon but rather as a continuation of a forty-year trend of global integration that has provided net benefits to the U.S. economy.  What is new is that the offshore outsourcing of jobs has moved beyond the manufacturing sector into a growing variety of service sectors, particularly information technology. 

 

The National Foreign Trade Council views this trend as an inevitable component of growing global economic integration.  American companies are under increasing competitive pressure to cut costs and improve productivity, and in many cases one way to do that is to transfer some functions outside the United States.  While this produces some job reductions here, it also has other, beneficial effects – more competitive companies, lower-priced goods and services for American consumers, and, to the extent offshore outsourcing is part of an overall foreign investment strategy, job creation as well.

 

These gains, however, are long term and diffuse while the losses tend to be short term and specific.  The result is the public controversy we are now experiencing.  It is the Council’s position that attempting to stop or limit offshore outsourcing would be counter-productive.  It would make our companies less competitive and, as a result, would ultimately cost us even more jobs.

 

A wiser approach is to adjust the circumstances that lead to offshore outsourcing and deal with the immediate consequences for those that are dislocated.  To that end, we support a four part approach:

 

1) Life-long learning; adjustment assistance. 

 

While there is substantial evidence that foreign trade and investment produce more jobs and growth here as well as elsewhere, it is no secret that the new jobs trade creates are rarely taken by the same people who have lost theirs as a result of trade.

 

Government policy should address the needs of two groups: 

 

  • Those who have lost their jobs and have limited opportunities for reemployment because their relevant skills are limited and/or their communities provide few opportunities.  
     
  • The next generation of workers – our children – who will confront a working environment that will require more sophisticated skills and more agility and flexibility than any preceding generation has confronted.    

To address these needs, we support expansion of the existing trade adjustment assistance program, including covering service workers, and we urge Congress and the Administration to devote more resources to education, particularly in math, science and engineering, and training to better equip future generations with the tools they need to deal with the rapidly changing work environment. 

 

2) Incentives to stay here. 

 

The reasons companies move off shore are largely economic.  The creation of a more business-friendly climate here in the United States could alter the calculations companies make and lead to more decisions to maintain facilities here.  A number of proposals are pending in the Congress in the tax and regulatory reform areas that could be helpful.  In the tax area, we favor legislation that will provide tax relief to businesses in ways that enhance their competitiveness but do not discriminate between companies that operate primarily in the U.S. and those that have substantial foreign operations. Our tax laws should not disadvantage U.S. companies competing in the international marketplace.  We also support Congressional action on tort reform and class action litigation in order to gain better control of onshore companies’ rapidly growing litigation costs. 

 

3) Staying ahead. 

 

America’s strength has always been innovation – our originality coupled with our ability to run faster and stay ahead of our competition.  Many of the innovations that have made America the world’s technology leader began with government support, often coming from the Department of Defense.  We endorse public policies that encourage innovation, including expanded government support for R&D that will create new, job-providing industries in biotechnology, nanotechnology, and other sectors we have not even contemplated.  We also endorse the President’s manufacturing initiative and urge full funding of the proposals contained in that plan.

 

4) Forward-looking US trade policy.  

 

The U.S. remains one of the most globally competitive economies worldwide.  Two central factors are behind this strength:  the openness of our economy to international trade and investment and a trade policy that maintains open markets and advances open, rules-based trade in markets overseas through ongoing trade liberalization efforts.  It is essential that the US continue to lead in opening markets and establishing transparent, non-discriminatory rules to govern trade and investment.  To that end, we reaffirm our support for the Doha round of multilateral trade negotiations as well as for high quality bilateral and regional free trade agreements.    

 

Taken together, we believe these approaches are an effective way to deal with offshore outsourcing constructively as an inevitable consequence of the global economic integration that has been instrumental in our country’s economic growth.  We urge Congress and the Administration to consider these approaches and to avoid short-sighted protectionist responses.