Some Democrats in Congress Anxious About China Developments

Democrats in Congress are wondering if the president's rush to get a deal with China will result in a deal that leaves China's mercantilist policies in place, while a member of the Senate Republican leadership expressed confidence that the deal that's expected just a month from now will be comprehensive.

Sen. Roy Blunt, R-Mo., head of the Senate Republican Policy Committee, told International Trade Today: "I don't think we're going to settle for less than structural reform, and I don't think 'rush' would be the word I would use here." He said that one more month will give the administration a chance to wrap up "what I hope will be a good agreement." Minority Leader Sen. Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., said on the Senate floor Feb. 25: "The president has shown the right instincts on China many times and I give him credit for that. I’ve praised him publicly for that. But at other times, I believe his eagerness for the appearance of accomplishment gets the best of him."

Schumer continued: "Recent history has taught us that when President [Donald] Trump makes unilateral concessions to China, as he did when he interfered in the sanctions against ZTE, China does very little for us in return. President Trump must not make the same mistake again, whether by interfering in the U.S. criminal charges brought against Huawei or otherwise decreasing our leverage, until and unless China makes meaningful, enforceable and verifiable commitments to end its theft of American intellectual property and other trade abuses." ZTE is a telecommunications equipment and mobile device maker; Huawei manufactures telecom equipment and consumer electronics.

In a brief interview at the Capitol with International Trade Today, Sen. Chris Coons, D-Del., said: "I have a concern that having taken up the cause of challenging and combating China's mercantilist behavior -- theft of intellectual property, forced technology transfer, the whole suite of things that have been going on for far too long -- I would hate to have him [Trump] now yield too quickly without actually securing the long-term wins for our economy that might be possible. I understand that his tariff policies are having a significant impact on domestic businesses and our relations with a lot of our allies, and that's creating real pressure for President Trump to accept some more modest or short-term concessions or a commitment to a certain amount of agricultural purchases, for example. But to miss the IP point would be to miss one of the structural differences that has to happen in the U.S.-China trade relationship."

House Majority Leader Rep. Steny Hoyer, D-Md., said he's concerned that Trump will be satisfied with too little from the Chinese. He said that's what happened after the first North Korean summit. "He claimed great victory after the first meeting and in fact nothing happened."

Schumer said he'd criticize Trump if that's the outcome, but some in Congress wondered whether Trump's insistence that the China text not be called a memorandum of understanding, and U.S. Trade Representative Robert Lighthizer's response that it will be called a "trade agreement," gives Congress an avenue to reject it if members think it falls short. Hoyer said that "if it's a trade agreement, it's subject to congressional oversight. I'm not sure the president knows exactly what he's saying some of the time ... maybe a lot of the time. We'll have to see what it is before we make a judgment on what role Congress plays on it."

Similarly, Coons said: "Our president sometimes speaks in very imprecise ways, and this is another one of these examples. It will be interesting to me to see what the actual text is." Senate Finance Committee Chairman Sen. Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa, said on a phone call with reporters Feb. 26 that if there is an agreement with China, he thinks it "will be able to be done in a way that doesn't require congressional action."