Brady Says China Package May Not Be Worth Moving

The top Republican on the House Ways and Means Committee, who will be one of the negotiators for the compromise China package, expressed pessimism that a version of the bill can be found that can get a majority vote in both the House and Senate. The Senate passed its version, the U.S. Innovation and Competition Act, with 67 votes; the House version, known as the Competes Act, only had one Republican on board.

"There will need to be serious changes to the bill if it’s possible at all," Kevin Brady, R-Texas, told reporters on an April 27 phone call before the House left for a week's break from Washington. "There are so many moving parts in this bill, it may collapse under its own weight. Especially if it doesn't meet the litmus test -- does this counter China's predatory trade practices against the U.S.? Does it confront China about the trade aggression throughout the world? If it doesn't meet that standard, this bill probably isn't worth moving."

He said even the bipartisan USICA doesn't meet that standard, in his view, but added, "I think with work, there could be, I think, enough substance there and I'm hopeful that we can find a way to do that."

He said there are a number of provisions in the House trade title that he's opposed to, including renewing Trade Adjustment Assistance, which he thinks is only warranted if the administration is negotiating new trade deals.

He said the proposal to remove China's eligibility for de minimis, screening outbound investment and the changes to antidumping and countervailing duty laws "have never been vetted." He said he supports the USICA version of the Miscellaneous Tariff Bill benefits program and the Generalized System of Preferences renewal, and said that he and other Republicans support "a very robust Section 301 exclusion process that recognizes the world and the economy is much different than it was a year ago. And our policies ought to recognize that."

On the changes to trade remedy laws, in particular, he said stakeholders need to be consulted, and hearings need to be held. "In my experience in trade is, language matters," he said, adding: "Without a good, careful deliberate review, we'd make the mistake of rushing. I'm confident it would come back to bite us."