Ripon Forum November-December 2005

Page 1

I'm one in a million.

Everyday nearly 1,000,000 Americans earn their living helping GM build and sell

cars in the United States. I'm one of them . My name is Brian love and "m a Team leader in Spring Hill, Tennessee. To me and my family, it's the most important job in America.






Se nate C hairman

Representative Nancy L. Johnron


H ou$C Chairwoman $enawr Richard Burr (NC) Senator Lincoln O. C hafee (RI) Senator Norm Coleman (MN) $cnamr Susan M. Collins (ME) Senator Orrin C. Hatch (UT) Senator Pat Robens (KS) Senator Gordon Smith (O R)

Senator Olympia J, Snowe (M E) Senator Arlen Specter (PA) SenalOr Ted S[~"\'ens (AK)

Representative Judy Biggert (I L) Repres<:m3tive Sherwood Boehlert (NY) Representative Ken Calvert (CA) Repr=m3tive Dave Camp (M!)

Representative Eric I. Camor (VA) Representative Michael Castk (DE) Representative Howard Coble (Ne) Represen tative Ander Crenshaw (Fl) ReprescntativeThomas M. Davis, 11 1 (VA ) ReprQcruadve V~rnon Ehlers (MI) Represem:l.tive Jo Ann H. Emerson (MO) Represen{aljn~

Philip S. English (PA) ReprcsclHalin" Mike Ferguson (NJ) Reprcsemati"e Mark Foley (Fl.) Representative VilQ Fossclla (NY) Representative Rodner Frelinghuysen (NJ) Representative Paul E. Gillmor (O HJ Rcpresent~J.[ivc Kar Granger (TX ) Rcprcsellt~J.[ive Melissa A. Hart (PAJ Representative Robin Hayes (NC) Rcpreselllarive David Hobson (O H ) Rt'presclltative Sue W. Kelly (NY) Reprcsentative Jim Kolbe (AZ) Representative Ray H. laHood (IL) Representative Sleven LaTourette (OH) Representative Jim Leach (IA) Rcpresenmive Jerry u:wis (CA) Representative Jim McCrery (LA) Representative Michael G. Oxley (OH) Rep rese ntative Tho mas E. Petri (WI) Representative Deborah Pryce (OH ) Reprcse nt~tive Adam Putnam (FL) Representative Jim Ramstad (MN) Representative Ralph Regula (OH) Representadve Joe Schwan. (MJ) Representative E. Clay Shaw, J r. (I'Ll Represent31ive Christopher Shays (en Representative John E. Sweeney (NY) Representative William M. Thomas (CA) Representative Fred UptOn (MI ) Reprcsellf<ltive James T. Walsh (NY) 111< Ripon SocK1y i. a fCO<:Irch and policy o,&-,n '""iol1 Ioa,ed in W",kins,on. D .C. Tbere .." N"iomJ Awxi"c rncmbe,.. ,hrouShout ,to., Uni,.d 5", ... Ripon i. ,uppo",,1 by,h'poer du ... ind;.;.! ...1 co."ibu,ions, "Id ,~e",'" rrorn i.. publ;"",io",_

T he Ripon Forum · Nov('mbcr/De(:(,lllber 2005


FEATURES: China 4 Navigating America's China Challenge - by Steven C le mons 8 Rise of China - by Arthur Waldron II China and America's Strategy in the Pacific - by John J. T kacik, Jr.

14 Greening the Dragon: The Environmental Costs of China's Economic Growth - by Jennifer L Turne r

FOREIGN AFFAIRS 17 Challenges and Opportunities for International Trade - by Len Condon

19 American Security Predicament on the Korean Peninsula - by Joshua A. Lynch

CAPITOL FORUM 21 The Struggle For Energy Independence - by Rep, Ralph Hall

IMMIGRATION FORUM 22 A Moment of Choice: Republicans and Immigration - by Tamar Jacoby

23 Six Principles of Comprehensive Immigration Refo r m - by Sen. Jo hn C ornyn

25 It's Time to Secure America - by Rep. Jim Kolbe 27 Squeezing the Immigration Balloon · by Rep. Kay Granger

SPEAKING OUT 30 Explaining the District of Columbia Fairness in Representation Act - by Rep. Tom D avis Tht R'f»~ n""" (lSSN 003~·5526) i. pubh, ...·nlOn,hl)" br11o~ Ripon ~ie,~. 11>< Rif'On Soc:icly" loc,,«I .. 1300 L S..«(, NW. Sui,,, 900. W ... hing.on. DC 20005. Pcriodi<aJ,p""togc r<nd,nS~1 W".hins,nn. DC .,,,I.Jdi,",,,..1 m.;ling Qlf..".. Posto""""r. .send ,dd~ chango (0: Tilt Rip"~ N,rJlrn . 1300 I. Slrttl. NW. Sui,,, 900, W"hingwn. DC 20005. Co,no""n ... opinion edi,,, and I"""", ", ,h" m.S"',"" >houhl b< .Jd,.....J "" Tht IbPM W.,hins,on. DC 20005 or m.y be ".I.,mi"ed cicctronially "': ... ""ifli~~"''1!«.6'1,.

r.,,,,,,,. 1300 LS,...". NW. Sui,e '}OO.

e Copyrigh' 2005 By n.., Ripon Society All Rishts

On" Vur Subocr;pt;on: S35.00 individual.


- - - ~ Prowlly prilll(tI in tI" U.S.A. - - I'ubli sh er The Ripon $ociely

C h ief Admini.uui vc




£.dimrial Co n5u h a n u

Greener and Hook

Desig" fA n Din:ct;o n

John M. I.... nta


ern.i,.., Services



Corporate Finan ce

Productio n

Richard S. K~lcr

Coord inator


Ban", Corp.

MoHy J. Milliken

Robin Kessler



'" forTnebon lit the ee.,ng iWp;Jrt. as Force 0. CllllilII'ItO VI8W On board WI!III Preaidei It RichIIrd

rnlitIrt honor guerd •


NiIIDn end he oIIiCIIII party corTIII"Ig to aw. for • hIiIID"ic first .... to that glint country by an American Presidellt.

_ _ _ _ _ _CB"ycSc'c~_'_e.n Clemons


hen he served as Deputy Secrerary of the Treasury, Harvard Presidenr Lawrence Summers frequently stitched inro his opening remarks an excessively hubris-laden assessmenr of American power. At one such speech , he asserted that the "world has never seen a nation such as the United Stalcs that possesses such unrivaled economic migIH... that the world has never seen a count ry such as [he United States of America Ihat had such a degree of global military power and global reach Ihat


a serious rival cannot even be imagined. ~ Summers believed that a more integraled and efficient Europe as well as a rapidly growing China would be<:ome high impaci players in the future bUi thaI neither would rival the U.S. on any serious front fo r a very long period. Today, JUSt a short six years after Summers' tri um phant commentary, America's curre nt accou nt balance has plummeted from rough ly 2.5% of GDP to nearly 7%, or roughly $700 billion a year or :aboul $3,000 per carim, with the

fas test growing and most significant part of that im balance associated with C hina specifically and Asia more broadly. In contrast, C hina now possesses nearly $800 billion in currency reserves, has overtaken the United Srares as Ihe largest trading partner of key American allies Japan and South Korea, is spawn ing free- trade agreemenrs with global stakeholders al a faster dip than the U.S., has mo re than 2 mill ion ind ividuals with wealth greater than $40 million each, and is preparing Bei jing to show itself

The Ripon Forum · NovembcrfDcccmbcr 2005

"If we fail to manage our relations with China adequately, the world will pay a heavy price."

off to the world in the 2008 Olympics. [n addition, China is ]>ouring great slim s into a modernized and enlarged military force. To give a sense of scale, Ihis newly empowered China has duee: provinces each larger Ihan Ihe entire populalion of Germany. The: Chinese economy has grown 9% pcr annum since 1978. hs cxpon growlh the last tWO ycars has bttn a hurricane force at 35% annually. Equally remarkable, while America is grappling with te rrorism-induced security cOStS and the perception of military overe){lension,

foreign direa investment into China thC' pas[ [WO years has surged 10 26% annually. When China was a poor nalion, mismanaged under [he command economy edicts of Commun ist leadershi p. China was largely contained both by the: challenges of maimaining internal stability and by an often vicious slruggle with the former Soviet Union - at Ihal limC' a convenient geopolitical assisl 10 U.S. interests. BUI roday. China. while S1ill managffi by nominal Commun ist leadersh ip, nonetheless is a rapidly developing market economy (or semi-markel economy given the f.'lCI that non-market decisions Slill govern a significant portion of C hina's business scCtor.) The Chinese arc we11 on their way 10 becoming a richer nalion - and 0 111' of the most serious and consequential questions filcing America and Ihe West is whelher China will play by Western rules and abide by the imernalional inuitutional arrangemems that Europc, Japan and the U.S. have eSlablished. Or. on the other hand, will seek 10 upend global affairs, refilshion global arrangemellfs to better suit irs preferences, challenge U.S. hegemony nOI only in Asia blLl globally. and as pan of ils design, anempt to end ilS decades-old Civil War and forcefully compel Taiwan to submit 10 Beijing's control. C hina has had a problematic few centuries - bUI it's back. Some: used 10 joke Ihal America fought Ihe Cold War and Japan won. Now it seems [hal AmC'rica is righ[ing the Global War on Terror, and C hina is winning. It has becomC' an oasis of siability and high growth during a period of security crisis in the U.S. and Europe. Managing China's rapidl y growing prelensions as both a regional and global power is fraught with danger. Transitions such as this do nOI Ofre:1I go well, as they didn'l when Western powC'rs uiC'd 10 conr.ain Ihe riSC' of Germany and Japan in IhC' early pan of IhC' 20lh CentUfY, and sewed ins[ead SC'eds of mllional rcscmment. In China's case. IhC' potC'lltial hisroric grievances and national "chip-o n-theshoulder" attitudes about Western colonial

The Ripon Forum ¡ NovC'mbcr/Dcccmbc:r 2005

exploitation run far more deep than whal GC'rmany or Japan C'xperiencffi. T hus. historical metaphors should give us somC' reason to move cautiously and carefully with C hi na and to make sure that we: do all that is possible to a\'oid repeating mistakes that were made in the past. Isolating C hina has huge: COstS, bUI so tOO docs robust embracC'. Maintaining balance while ineremC'ntally integrating China wilh lhe res t of [he global system should be among the highcst priorities of the U.S. China is a conundrum in America's fmu re, and Ihere are opposing currenlS within both American political panics as to the Cllurse the nation should go vis-!a-vis China. Republica ns afe divided il1lo several camps. One of Ihese is the KissingerlScowcroft rC'alist camp thai believcs lhat America must try to deeply embed C hina in global institutions and manage its emergence as a great power wilh an unscnlimental calculation of economic and mi litary intereslS that avoids from-on conflict and yields mutual prosperity. OlhC'rs believC' that deep economic imegralion between C hina and the U.S., and fashio ning China as a massive exam ple of global middle class development, may lay the groundwork fo r democratic self-determination. Then Ihere is a neoconscrvaliveinspirffi group led by the likes of William Kristol, Richard Perle. and Frank Gaffney who view such economic development ties bem'ccn China and the U.S. as appeasemem of :tmi-dC'mocra[ic Communist Ihcology and enrichment of a likely foe and peer coml>ClilOr againsl American imerests. Th is wing of tht: Republican C'slablishment sees coll ision with China as a ncar certainlY and that America musl marshal in resources to prepare for a global Struggle: againsl C hina and its pretensions. In Democratic circles thC're is also a deep divide wi th, on one side. a neoliberal wlllg of pro-business Democralic Lc-adership Council types filvoring robust economic engagement with Chi na, while on thC' olher. a group that elevates the importance of C hi na subscribing to global




Navigating America's China Challenge

norms of human righ[Ji protections and democratic choice over economic faCtors. It is more than ironic that in some cases, House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi who has chided Chi na on human rights abuses might find he rself morally and politically aligned with Senator Sam Brownback or Senator John Kyl who think that America and (he West should not reward what they have ca.llM a "thug regime" that oppresses its people and seethes at democratic practice and genuine civil sociery. Given these realities, whllt might a roster of policy prescriptions for America look like that tllke into account both Chi na's potential as a possible menace and threat to American interests, but also the possibility that Chi na may evolve into a nation that does the world great good and which may generate significant wealth and new possibilities for the U.S.? AlrC2dy, for example, China has been a powerhouse: in lifting more people OUt of dollar-a-day poverty than any other nation. Ch ina has put a man into outer space and is proving w be an important source for a new generation of original scienl'ific technological innOv:ltion. Americ.1.'S great success with China, which started with Nixon's brave trip there in 1972 and Kissinger's diplomatic genius, is that China's 1.2 billion people have become increasingly integrated into a global system of governance and accountabiliry. T his has happened rapidly; and the question is whether China can change :11 a f.m enough pace 10 adapt to modern global norms, or whether the system will erode or collapse if China r.,ils to make the IH.'CCSSary transitions. China used 10 be isolated. In the view of this author, we can't go back without a disastrous global convulsion. Alternatively, if we fai l to manage our relations with China adC(juately, the world will pay a heavy price. So, what to do. First, we must rewgnize mat America's love-hate, engage-disengage relationship with China is a problem. C hina is a major nation of conSl'<luence, so important to the future welfare of rhe U.S. and the world that it cannor be cut off completely, not without destroying much of America's economy. That does not require appeasement of Chinese misbehavior or tolerance of reckless objectives. It means that our nations wi1llong be \\-'Otking our deals, and like the form er Soviet Union, the smartest way to steady an important relationship is to move that relationship away from binary, on-off, all eggs-in-one-basker poli tics. We


must build deep, broad, complex networks of government and civil society interaction. We need robuSt pcople 1'0 lead multilateral efforts across all sectors of society. Why? Because if relations get explosive or testy in one sector of the relationshi p. there are other stabilizers built into the SY$lem, and diplomacy can continue to attempt to get most aspeCtS of the relationship right. This can be called a "Shock Absorber" strategy. This is a relationship characterized by an ascending Chinese "national ego¡ and a defensive, wary American ego. America needs to rid itsclffrom unhelpful Cold War analogies that could make our experience


2008 A worker Installs a billboard featunng Beijing as a candidate CIt'1 for hostmg the 2C08 Olympic Gamas. Bailing was elected the Host fOl" the Games In July of 2001.

during the Cold War with the Soviet Union, which had radically different ambitions and pretensions than modern day China, a self-fulfilled ~unwanted rcaliry" in our future with C hina. China and the U.S. need 10 negot iate the terms of C hina's emergence; and pan of America's acquiescence to that rise should be tied to obligations from C hina for responsible regional and global stewardship. China's key role in forcing North Korea to negotiate about its nuclear weapons program is heartening and should build confidence that China is committed to global stability. Engage, engage, engage. America's distracrion in the Middle East while China prospered has given powerful incentives to C hina to continue to tfy and mainrain our dis traction the re - most likely III COVCTt

ways. While America organized much of the world to assist in our Global War on Terror, China went on a charm offensive and filled the vacuum of OUT absence widl sed uctive and powerful diplomacy. Chi na is now com peting with America in Asia nor in a head-Io-head way but through brilliant multilateral iniliarives such as the East Asia Summit/East Asia Community proposals il has pushed and OIher multilateTal efforts in securi ty and economic arenas. This Moew mul[ila(cralism~ by China is com pering wilh AnH~ rica's penchant for bilateral deals between itself and other countries like Japan, Australia, and South Ko rea. While America is pany to Olher multilateral effons in the region, i( relies on bilateral arrangements and has not urongl), pushed muhilateral institutions. The recent Six-Party Talks are one exception. but America's commitment to that proCl:SS has also been frequently marked by inconsistency and am bivalence. So, America needs to be consistently engaged in Asia broadly and nOt leave vacuums for China [0 fiJI, which il will, not because it's a dangerous nation, but because any ascendant powerful regional power would do the same. America needs to deaease econom ic dependency on China ... but not too fast. C hina and the U.S. are playing a game of Russian roulette where both players know that at some point one or the other will pull a trigger that undermines the health of both. America is fitr tOO dependent on China for its economic liveli hood. China, likewi se. is exploiting America's binge appetite to grow its econom y III structurall y unsound ways. C hina must move some of its productive capacity to domestic consumption. America must SlOp blaming C hina for its current account deficit and CUt consumption. In the long run, America can do this by modifying irs tax structure to reward saving and investment and tax consumption. China, on the other hand, needs its people, who arc saving at a rate of 50% of income, to trust' their future enough to spend. China could move forward in creating greater health care provisions, pension tools, and other soph isticated investment and financial tools, so that the Chinese release cash to bolster domestic consumption. The toughest item to crack will be Taiwan, where preservation of the status quo is in the interests of the U.S., btl! which powerful forces in Taiwan arc trying to undo. T;)iwan has geographic problems The Rif)OlI Forum ' November/DecembC'r 2005

that America must be honeSI aboUi. C h ina, meanwhile, must fed th at an unacceptable price wi ll be paid not only by the pun iTive aClions of U.S. forces bur by relat ions with others in the region and arou nd the world if it aftacks and seeks 10 reunify Taiwan by force. America needs 10 cominue 10 give Taiwan the wherewithal 10 keep Chi na guessing about the high price th:1I invasion would entail. AI the same time, America can not countenance Taiwan hijacking Ihe Penragon or Ihe helm of U.S. fore ign policy 10 guaranree its sovercigmy if Taiwan dedares independence. America docs not recognize Taiwanese independence, and this delicate balance must be maintained lest other major goals come apart. Revaluation of Ihe yuan againsl the dollar is import3.llI, but needs to be pursued in Sleps. Quick adjuslments can be painful and create vast unintended consequences as they did after the yen-dollar reV;1luation in the 1985 Plaza Accord. A summit should be called by the President of the U.S. that docs nor ha mmer C hina for its economic success, but which makes

dear the imponance of "sustai nable growlh" on both sides of this key relationship. And C hi na's currency should floa! up with the strength of its economy, but needs 10 be moved 10 full fl oati ng status in stages, perhaps by im plemen!ing higher ranges of floatation every twO years fo r the next eight years. That wilt help prcvent shocks from quick currency shifu. The resource area is one of the most crit ical given Ch inese energy demands as well as [he faCt that it has one-th ird the renewable water sources that is the average global norm. C hina is currently engaged in buying lo ng-term oil contract and futu res. America needs 10 be doi ng the same, JUSt 10 make sure that America docs not take for granted the privileged role it has from most oil exponers IOday and find that tomorrow China has legal control of a significalll share of global oil OUtput. There are many olher aspects to a full policy roadmap for engaging China in the future. Such an exercise would be V;1luable withi n thoughtful Republican circles so as to prevent myopic interests and ad hoc policy fo rmulations to ero(le the foundation

The Ripon Forum ¡ No\"emlx-rlDecembcr 2005

for a long-Ierm balanced strategy with China. The most importam th ing America can do is 10 work to show Chi ll:! Ihe benefits of respo nsible behavior and ra rher than seei ng ils mulrilateralis l11 , though mostly anchored in Beijing, as a threat, applaud it. Support China's aspirations for greatness, as long as these aspirations do not upend the global system. Applaud the lift of so many Out of poverty in C h ina as long as China can "sustain" this growl h economically and environmentally. If there is misbehavior or aggression, America shou ld respond and not be sentimental about C hinese aggression, but thus fa r, Chi na is proving to be a worthy competitor with a vision of its stake in the world. The question is whether there can be cornpeling versions of globalization and global and regional inSlirutions - based in Beijing and Washingmn. CI SUII(II C/~mo1/.S is SmioT Frllow 6Dimtor, Am~ricall StmuKJ Progmm, Nrw Amrrica Foulldation Imd is pllblislm oftbr popular po/irim! blog,



Tb, \'(




. ~





The Shanghai slcytllle and nverfront at mght. O'II08'S booming economy IS hlQhly rnbalanced beLWeen the vsnsformed coastal CItIeS and the hundreds of m~hons of people v.flo Irve In the wretchedly poor IIlland fBm"l villages .


rise of C hin a~ is one of those phrases Ihal has entered com mon usage without ever being properly examined or defined. When we encounter il we think of stunning economic growth. military sHcngth, men in space, the Olympics, :an insistem demand for respe<:l-all hel':.llds of the arrival on the world stage of a new, confident , and massively important player. One docs not cavil about details, for C hina seems set 10 rise, smoothly and inevitably, 10 the first rank of every son of power. The only question is how the world

will make room. This is an impressive vision, and to a considCr:lblc degree it describes a realif}'.


But to the extent that the vision ass umes that China's rise will be 5 01 00lh and without problems, it is profoundly misleading. For the People's Re public of C hi na, as currently structured , as a Communist autocracy lacki ng laws, robust institutions, and most freedoms, is unlikely to survive its own nse, caused, ironically, by changes It made after Mao Zedong's death in 1976, which unleashed immensely powerful social fo rces. Most discussions of C hina's rise focus externally: on how the world will deal with a new economic and military power. They miss the poim . The world has accommodated new players befo re and will do so

again. The real question is not what C hina's place will be in the world, but rather what sort of a place the new Chi na will be. Will it be democratic or aUlocratic? Will it have a private economy or one that is state run? Will it be stable, or driven by tensions? Even chaotic? Inside C hina, order is already fraying. 74,000 confl icts between government and people were officially reponed last year. Beijing is proving powerless to reassert comro1. Rather than smooth ascent, major change, comparable to the end of Communism in the USSR, is likely in the not 100 distant future. C hange is creating a class of people

The Ripon Foru m ' November/December 2005

"The real question is not what China's place will be in the world, but rather what sort of a place the new China will be." who have: bOlh the education and the !:Conomic independence to funCtion as true cil ~ izens. But Beijing dares nO I permit them to participate in politics, wh ich leads to ever mouming pressure. Imernationally China seeks 10 be treated as a "normal" country. even though it remains a diClatorship in a

world of democracies and follows a mercantilist approach to economics rather than genuine frc<: trade-remember that the Ttnminbi is nill not convertible. Finally, in a world where no St ale th reatens her. China is engaged in a massive military buildup thaI is increasingly worrying to her neighbors. leI us consider econom ics, military development , and the political futu re in that order. In each caS( we will find tcnsion and comradiction , rather than a dear road ahead. Economic development is perhaps ,he most sniking of Ihe forca driving C hina's ~ risc:." A country Ihal tr.lded SClrcely:lt all in the 19605 and 19705 now runs massive foreign exchange deficits, with reserve;; now lOpping seven hundred billion U.S. dollars. More and more Chinese have money; foreign COmmelH<llOrS projcci rapid growlh decade;; into the future. This growth is real but it is also highly imbalanced. C oas tal cities have been tr.lnsformcd but inland farm villages where hund reds of millions of Chinese: li"e are mostly as wretchedly poor as ever. If you add up the Chinese: population, staning wilh Ihe richest and moving down, by the lime you have counted half of Ihe people you have accoulHed efTt.'Clively for all of the wealth--one of Ihe most unequal income disnibutions in the entire world. Furthermore, Ihe sources of growth are not sUSIainable. Real development in a country as large as Chi na can only be dri"en by domestic demand. The world simply c.annOI absorb enough Chinese exportS to lift up all of her people. But bec.ause so many people remain daper;lIely poor, domestic demand is slack. The real mOlors of development are (\vo. The Cirsl is The Ri!Xln Forum ¡ NovemberfDecember 2005

e1lpons, half of them produced by companies in which forei gn capit:ll have some role. The second is govcrnmclH spending. The C hinae government is unwilling, for now, 10 yield control of Ihe economy 10 genuine market forca, preferring instead to hold on 10 the state owned enterprises, mosdy money losing. These: can be sustained only by massi"e loans. Loans corne from the state banks which are the only place ci tizens can deposit savi ngs. [n the shon run, easy money permits state owned enterprises to c1lpand capacity and hire more peopleall of which is counted as "growth" in Gross National Product calculations, I!ut it might make more sense to subtract this money, because most of it will never be repaid or even yield a profi!. Yet by some calculations, more than fOTty percent of Chi nese: "growth'" is accounted for by such state-directed lending. Nevenheless, econom ic loosening has been sufficient 10 unleash real growth as well. Even though Ihe government banks deny credil 10 private entrepreneurs and pour money inlO state enterprises, free markets and private investmenl are developing, slowly but surel y eroding the whole ecoCommuniSI rule. AI some point China's rulers will havc

Feature: Rise of China E.ither cOlHinue growth, which will mean genui ne privatization o f the economy, market nH:chanis ms, and currency cOllverribiliry, or try ro continue the present paltern , which will lead evenrually 10 economic fa ilure. Now let us consider weapons. Economic developme nt has permilled Chin3.¡S go\'ernment 10 build up 3. military force far SlTonger than anythi ng seen in the past hundred years. Today China has the largest military in the wo rld by number, armed with adva nced fighter aircraft, nuclea r subma rines, ballistic missiles, and so forth. As capabi lities grow, C hina is adopting a more and more fOT\vard military posture. Thus she is currentl y confronting Tok),o over eonuol of the Sea of Japan and its supposed pelToleum deposits, intimidating Taiwan with a missile buildup (more than seven hundred ballistic missiles now ta rget the island, which is roughly one fo r e\'ery thirty thousand Taiwanese), she is atlempting to brac ket India by supporting PakiSla n :md Ba ngladesh, and targets American fo rces with supersonic missiles against which our Navy has no defense. She has forcibly taken territory from bOlh Vielllam and the Philippines. C learly she aspires 10 be able 10 do more than simply defend herself. She wa nts to be the preeminent power in Asi3. and one of the wo rld's great powers. BUI once :l.galll we encounter contradiction. Actions, as NeWlOn ta ught us, elicit reactio ns. in military and security af'f.ti rs jusl as in physics. If one power slam buildi ng up her military in a way that worries others, Ihey will likely start to develop their own milir.a.ry capabilities. and pool thei r resources to balance the emerging power. Most important is rhe shift- in Japanese allirudes tOward securiry. Not long ago Ihat coulHry thought it had foresworn war and maimained strictly li miTed forces. Now she is jointl y developing a m issile defense system in close coopera tion with the United States and seems likely, un less China changes course, to acqui re some formidable off'ensi\'e capabilities as well. As with the economy, so with Ihe milinry, China's government will soon face a choice. If il continues [Q build up irs offensive military capabilities, it will call infO being military capabilities in other countries, some of which, like Japan, are far more technically capable tha n C hina. We have


Dlalrman Mao on a Peopie's Bank of Ollila 10 Yuan RenmmbllRM81 note. The RMB. oM'lIch means the "people's currency." t5 still not convertible O'llna follows a mercantilist approach

rather than genUine tree trade

al ready seen India develop nuclear weapons and begin a mililary build up, in response [Q C hinese actions. Si nce the countries menaced militarily are also China's trading partners, the military build up Ihreatens to wreck the economy. The biggest imponderable, hO\\'('\'er, is China's fulure political SlnlCfllre, W ill she lihcralize and if so how? Will Communism com inue. even strength from economic groWlh? Will social tensions boil O\'er? Many foreigners ignore these questions, taking as realifY the smooth 3.ssura nces of China's leaders and beguiled by their lavish hospitality. Like Beijing's rulers, they imagine that some sort of a stable point can be found betWeen aut horitarian rule and freedom. China watchers speak of a combination of rising living standa rds and selective repression as the key 10 stabitity, But history gives them little suppo rt . Faced wit h problems of poverry and popular dissa tisf.tcrion, many have anempted to retain power by making limited reforms, But the enterprise is fraughr with perils, for once one (hing is changed, the hitherto somnolent populatio n will staT! thi nking about other things that need changing, so far from damping the desire for reform, limited atlempts at it actually feed the demand. China does not permit decrions. her government owns and controls all media, she has no genuine legal sys(em and lens of www.rlpon,

dlO lIs:mds of political prisoners and political

parties arc ilk-gaJ. In the past year or rwo C hi na's go\'crnmcm has become preoccupied with domestic problems. Corruption is more widespread and entrenched than ever in the past. lmclJcclUals are fruslralcd by their lack of freedom. Ordinary people :Ire' increasi ngly fenive. Farmers fight police forces when they try to appropriate their land for highly profitable building projects. Attempts to control the media and thought 3rc extensive, bill unli kely (0 succeed . Demands for dramatic political change are growing louder and louder. The rise of C hi na is thus more precarious and irs course far harder 10 predict ,hall is generally realized. Sustaining it will require domestic changes that have the potential of upsening social order within China. If cha nge is accomplished smoothly, the wo rld will have litde cause for concern . T he da nger is that the present course of the go\'ernme m makes that high ly unlikely. Should Chi n3.'S rise falt er and become erratic, that will genuinely threaten world order. ( J

- Arthur l'flaldron is tilt Lmdrr Pro/roor o/Imrmarional RrlatioflS at tilt Univrrsiry o!PmmyhJ(1nia and Vier Pmidmt o/tlu Int~r1If1tional AssrJsmmt C(lIt~r

and Stmugy

ill WflShingto ll. D.C.

The Ripon Forum ' November/ December 2005

China and America's Strategy in the Pacific By John J. Tkacik, Jr. erween 1969 and 1972, PresidelH Richard M. Nixon and his national security advisor Henry A. Kissinger devised a strategy of vi rt ual alliance wi th China 10 balance Soviet power in Eurasia - and incidentally to outflank the North VietnanleM. That relationship matured and succeeded brill iantly through the 19805 with an dfecrivc and determined U.S.~China campaign that, among Other things. bled the Soviet army while in Afghanistan. The Washington- Beijing partnership was a major factor in the collapse of the USSR in August 1991. But with the dem ise of the USSR, the grand organ izing principle of the U.S.-China relationship evaporated. In the 1980's, political reforms in China tracked well with C hina's expanding «onomie freedoms. And, as someone who saw the " Beijing Spring" and the emergence of robust political debate among China's elites throughout ,hat decade, I hoped that America's post-Cold War relationsh ip with C hina would be bolstered on a modernizing China that shared a reverence for human rights, the Tule o f law, and the expansIon of political partiCipation . America's stake was in China's democr3,iz.ation, a process that seemed to track with economic reform. The bloody suppression of China's democracy movemem In Tiananmen Square in the weeks following June 4, 1989, changed everything. Americans were witness to ,he violence on CNN, perhaps ,he first global crisis of the satellite television age. Congressional de mands for powerful trade and investment sanctions on Chi na reflected the revulsion of the American people against the Chinese army's violence. This is a long way of saying that by 1992, Americans had already realized they shared few political or moral values with China's rulers, and suddenly were aware they shared no strategic goals either. It has been a long time since American diplomats and strategists have actually looked at their country's srake in the Pacific

and the challenge of China. But the time has long since passed to sta rt rethinking the U.S.-China relationship, and it may already be tOO late to do much 10 sllape China's future. America now faces an econom ic superpower in East Asia which has already eclipsed Japan in military power and regional influence and which will soon surpass Japan as the top industrial power in Asia. This. in itself, might not be that wornsome. Economic superpowers are wonderful. They are markers for expons, sources of imports, financial panners, and in general provide the vibr:LI1t dynamism of innovation that is generated by healthy competition. or course, economic superpowe rs must be stakeholders in the international trade system - that is, they must be commiued 10 playing by the rules. Economic superpowers become a tad worrisome, however, whcn their massive industrial capaci ties are driven by merca ntilist instincu to ga1ll trade advalllage at all costs. When they require foreign manufacturing investors to give up thei r trade secrets. intellectual property, al1(1

The Ripon Forum · NovemberfOecember 2005



u.s PreSIdent George W Bush gr-eets Ctuna·s Pres.dent Hu Jlntao In New York. September 13, 20)5 . Hu IS III New Yortt for the United Nations General Assembly meeting.

technologies, as a price for entry inlO their domestic markels. tmalirarian economic superpowers are not playing by the rules. They flollt them. Mercantilist ic regimes seek to exclude fore ign indust rial goods (l ike advanced semiconductors, for e:rcam ple) from their market:S, instead demanding that foreign manufitcturers invcst in completely new infrastructure 10 produce those same goods domestically, even at higher cost. They keep their currency at a level where: the treasury can amass nearly a trillion dollars in foreign exchange reserves and usc their holdings 10 purchase control of overseas resources such as rare earth mi nerals, hydrocarbons, scrap metals, paper, and the like, to be sold 10 domestic producers at subsidized pnces In the proccss deprivi ng markcts elsewhere of those They invent entirely ncw resources. induslrial sfandards for domestic markets to force foreign corporations to divulge their tcchnologies and source codes. China's industrial policy incorporatcs all thcse measures. Depury Secretary of State Robert Zoc:llick used the term "mercamilist" fOllr times to describe China's



China and America's Strategy in the Pacific

industrial policies in lhe course of a short

speech on US.-China relations in New York on September 21, 2005. As a former

U.S. Trnd{' Representative, Mr. Zod lick knows wmc rcantilism" about as wel l as anyo ne in America. Sti ll, mercantilist instincts can be dealt with in ,he course of trade negoti:lIions with stakeholders in the imern:l.donal system. BUI when merC3.ntiiism is :11 the' ideological hean of a monopolistic, 101111i· [:Irian, disciplined and ruthless political parly. mere negoriations don't help. [ served as de puty consul general III Gu:m gzholl, C hin a, ill February 1992 when C hina's "paramount lC3dc r~ Deng Xiaoping an nounced in nearby Shem.hen thc demise of orthodox commun ist ideology and rcpbced it wi th an degandy rc-dcfirll'd ~Soc ia l i s m with Chi nese Charac(e ris tics.~ My reponi ng cable to the State Department quoted Mr. Deng's exhorrarion to Com munist Party cadres: "don't :u gue about whether some \po licyJ is surname(1 'capitalism' or surnamed 'socialism', because anything that increases the comprehensive strength of the nation is soci:llism with C hinese characteristics." T here it was, For the Chi nese CommuniSt Party, Maoism was dead. Collttli\'ism ....'as dead. Don't even argue aboul whether something is "socialist,w As long as il kincreases the (:omprellensi\'e strength of the na lion.~ anYl hing goes. C learly, this was not socialism. This was n:lI ionalism. At best (or maybe worn), it's national socialism . Th is ki nd of narionalism is downright frighteni ng when il begins to arm itself with a nuck"ar, technologically advanced military machine. A totalitarian superpower is dangerous. Much primer toner has been expended exphining that C hina ~lIy isn't ~tolalitari · an.~ C hina's really ~a ll[hori ta ri an.w But on the matrix devised in J 965 by Ca rl Friedrich and Zbigniew Br/.l'""linski, C hina prelty well fu lfill s the si x classes of a "lOlalitarian" syStem. It has an offi cial ideology to which general :Idherence is dem:lIlded. the ideolo· gy intended to achieve a 'perf«t final stage of mankind' or in this case, the "ever increasing comprehensi\'e strengt h of the nation it is ruled by a single mass party, hiernrch ically organized, closely interwoven with the state bureaucracy and is typically led by one man; the party has monopolistic cont rol of the armed forces; Ihe party main· W



rains a monopoly on all mass communica· tion; it operates a system of terroristic police control; and then~: is monopoly authority over the entire economy. Anyone who doesn't believe these conditions obtain in C hina, isn't a C hinese citizen . There is no part of C hinese life that may opern.tC outside the control or -guidantt" of the Party. No chu rch or temple, no labor union. no newspaper, book publisher, no internet site, no ado ption agency. no procreation decision, no stamp collecro rs dub, no nothing, that is permilled to ex ist without sponsorshi p of the Party or state. In 200 5, Western journalists were given a taste of how this totalitarian society controls lhe masses. One peasant leader in G uangdong was (:'ca!Cn 10 a pu lp by uniformt-d thugs in the presence of a British reponer. A blind advOC1te for [he poor villagers was hauled away aft er Th~ Wmhingroll Post reported on his work in Hebei. A researcher for 711( N~/lJ York Ti1ll0 was tTackt-d down as soon as he turned on his mobile phone in Shanghai, and cha rged with espionage. The Public Security Ministry has a corps of 30,000 ~ illl e rn el police" overseeing :lTmies of civi l· ian ~b i g mammas~ at every ISP (internet service provide r) who monitor chat roo ms, e'mails, and attempts 10 view governmem· blocked websites. C hinese journalists' bonuses are linked (0 "positive repons from leadership cadres,~ and their pay is docked for negative rCJ>OTIS. Th is is not a mere ~aut horitarian" system. Some academics (and U,S. government offi cials as well) believe that China will democrati7.C 011 its own. But the .sad faCt is th<lt while refo rms and broader econom ic freedom s have undoubtcdly improved since the Tiananmen repression of June 4, 1989, politial and civil rights. religious righlS, labor rightS, land righrs, and procreation rights have demollStr::lbly deteriorared. There is. in short, no positi ve linkage between economic reform and indi vidual frt:edoms. The question is, what will the Asia· Pacific regio n look like in the yea r 2050. if China is the do minant power in the region - and a global superpower. a "pcer competi. w IOr of the United States? American policy·makers should consider rhe lessons of the last cemury and the rise of ind ustri· ally advanced powcrs driven by nationalism that began pOll ring vast amou nts of nalional treasure into their ;mnies. Bot h Japan and Germany did so with litlle fan · www.

f.1 re in the 1930s. Both had thriving (:;vil· ian markets thaI supported research and developmem of dramatic new military tcchnologies. The Soviet Union was a d iffere nt SlOry. In thc years before the USS R's collapse, Western travelers returned wide-cycd at the ulter desolation of the Russian economy. h's JUSt the opposite with C hina. In January 2005, one American congrcssman who had rerurned wide-eyed from his fi rst congressional delegation (or "Code\") to Beiji ng told me he. could sum up the Codet's reaction ill twO words: ~ Uh -oh!~ T he visit inspired the formation of the Congressional Chi na Caucus (CCC). One of thc CCC's co·chairs, Rep. Rand y Forbes of Vi rgi nia explained Ihalt he Caucus is not ami-China, Tather it is ~ mo re analys t than ch cc rlead e r. ~ M r. Forbes then q uickl y added. ~We will be focusing a great deal of an ent ion on looking at the risc in the mil itary on lhe part of China." In Lewis Ca rroll's ~T hroll gh the Looki ng G lass," the C heshi re Cat confronts Alice wit h a terrifyi ng reality: if you don't know where you're going, any road will gel yo u there. If only there were a Cheshire Cat to give a similar jolt to America's fo reign policy establish ment as it ponders the unfolding geopolitical rcalignmelll in the Western Pacific. WashinglOn seemingly has no idea wh:1.I kind of a 2 1St Cenlllry it wants 10 sec in the Asia Pacific regio n, and conse(luentIy has nu road map for achieving it. O ur C hina pol icy is a si ngular example of this 1>oIicy lacuna . Normally intelligen t U,S. diplomats into ne with straight.faces that the United States is still waiting to sec what road C hina will take. On the State Depanmem web·site, Deputy Secretary Zoellick's Sept ember spe«h is entitled ~ Whither C hina· From Membership 10 Responsibility?" The question mark is poignant. Mr. Zoellick decla red, ~ for the United States and ,he world, the essential questioll is - how wi ll C hina use its influcnce?~

As the C hinese say, ~ I is t en to the words. bUt watch what's don e.~ So fa r, C hina's lx.-havior in virtually C\'ery sector of imerna tional relations has been counter to the interests of democracy. free {rade, human rights, prol ifera tion, intellectual property and labor rights. Even in the area of internatio nal health, China's failure to alert their neighbors and the wo rld 10 the ' nlC

Ripon ":orum · Novcmber/Occcmbcr 2005

Tanks Sit In 9 street In


two days altaf'

the SUppn!SSIOO of the

pro-dernocr&cy proteStS in nananmen

SARS outbreak caused a major panic, and its shilly-shallyi ng on Avian Flu hasn', ~n much b<:ner. AIDS ac,ivislS in cenrral China are harassed and imprisoned. China hasn't been much help in managing its own envi ronmemal problems, much less global ones. And international organizations who want 10 save the Greal Panda, China's unofficial national animal, fi nd themselves footing the bill fo r wildlife management programs, while China spends its money on a world-class space program. China is the prolecror of every vicious regime it an fin d. Burma, Uzb<:kistan, Iran , Sudan, Zimbabwe, just to name a few. C hina praises the ~North Korean leader's beneficial contributions ro regional stability and world peace," and with Russia conducts an im pressive joint mil itary exe rc i ~ near North Korea to warn the United States that it is capable of blocking any use of force against Pyongyang should it not ultimately abandon its nuclear weapons. Other despotisms around the globe, and hidden junras and coup-plouers who lay waiting in the democracies can only take to heart that, when their time comes, C hi na's communist leaders will be there to suppOrt them economically and

militarily againsl ,he meddlesome WCSI. One does not need a doclOrate in the bleeding obvious to see that the United St3.tes has a strategic interest in keeping democratic Asia beyond the influence of tOtalitarian China. But until the scales fall from the eyes of Washington's fo reign policy establishment as to the true character of a rising China, it will simply cross irs collecrive fingers and hope that C hina will democratize all by itself. In January 1983, President Ronald Reagan's National Security Council OUtlined a detailed strategy for ~ Relations with the Soviet Union," a strategy that was astoundingly successful. An American, Japanese and Eu ropean strategy for relations with C hina must be multi-dimensional. It must include a consensus on trade, financial, human rights, and even military measures, but mUSI also include adj usting domestic pol icies that hamper economic growth al home. But in a ~Tweh'e Step Program" for dealing with the ri~ of a IOtalitarian C hina, the first step is to admi t you have a problem and decide what your goal is. O nce that's done, the Cheshire Cat would point out, then you can stat{ figuring our how 10 get there. ~

The Ripon Forum ¡ November/December 2005


- John Tkadk (pronounad 7asrik., is Smior Rtuarrh Ftllow in Asian Studin at Tht Htritagt Foundation with a rtstarrh focus on US poJicin toward China (including Hong Kong and Macao), Taiwan and Mongolia. Mr. Tkaeik is a rttirtd diplomat who St:rwd owruas with tht Fortign St:rviu in Taiwan, laland, China and tht fonntr British Crown ufon} of Hong Kong, as wt:II as in tlu D~partmtnt ofStau in Washington, D.C, wlNrt h~ was Chit/of China Analysis in tht Burtau oflnulligtnu and Rtstarrh (lNR). Afttr Mr. Tkadk's rttirtmtnt, ,,~ worktd in Hong Kong as viet pmidtnl for ~xt~ma' rtlatioflS for R.J. Rrynolds Tobacco Imtrnational. H~ jointd TIlt Htritagt Foundation in 2001.


Mr. Tkacik is tht Editor and main contributor to "Rtthinking Ont China~. a book pub';sh~d by Tht Htritagt Foundation in 2004. H~ has a masttr's dq;rtt from Harvard UnjlJtr1iry and a badJtlors dtgru from G~orgrto/(.m Uniwnity.


]l i

t \,.....

t \,.....

The Environmental Costs of China's Economic Growth By Jennifer L. Turner erhaps no country besides the Un ited Slates will have a greater impact on global energy and environmental strategies in the coming years than the People's Republic orehina (PRe). The world's most populous n:nion already consumes more: energy and emirs morc: greenhouse gases than any coumry except the Uni ted States, and may surpass the United States in both categories within twO decades. Over the past year, C hina's oil hunger and growing pollUTion problems have become a growing concern in Washington, viewed as potential threats !O the United Stares and the global environment. Narrowly viewing C hina's energy and environmenral problems as Ihrc:n s, however, ignores the significa/H


opportunity for Sino-U.S. collabonnion in these areu. Before delving into the pOlcmial security, human health, and environmelllal benefitS of cooperation, first a look at the extent of (he environmelllal and energy challenges facing China.


China's Ecological Implosion China's sustai ned growth over the pasl 2) years appears 10 be an economic miracle. The economic reforms sparked by Deng Xiaoping brought millions of Chinoe OUI of povert}'. With an enviable average GOP growth rai l.' of 9 per«m over the past 20 years, C hina seems 10 be }'el another "Asian Tiger." However, C hina's economic explosion has created an ecological implosion in the count ry. Severe ai r and waler pollution, along with water shortages, are th reatening human health, industrial prodUClion , and food crops. Land degradation and deforestation arc exacerbating floods and doenificn ion, as well as endangering the COUntry's rich biodiversiry. Pan Vue, the vi«-minisrer of China's Slate Environmemal Protection Adminislr.lIion (SEPA), S(2led quite frankly in interviews that China's ec0nomic miracle is a myth since environmen(21 degradation is cosring the country nearly 8 percent of its ann ual GD I~ www.riponsociety.o rg

T he s(:uiSlics of China's environ mental problems do indicate a potentially negative future fo r the cou ntry. C hina's rapid economic growth and indusuializationcoupled with insufficient price reforms, a populace ill-informed aboU[ environmen121 prorection, and bureaucratic inefficiencies that inhibit adequare funding for protection and implementation of environmen121 laws and Sland:mis-have taken a serious roll on the coulllry's environment and nanITal resources. For example: • In terms of ai r pollU[ion , 16 OU[ of 20 of the wo rld's most polltlted eities arc in C hina. • More than 75% of the water in ri vers flowing through C hinese cities is unsuil2ble for drinking or fishing. · 700 million Chinese drink wa ter that is at least partially polluted. • Less than half of the 20 1"0 40 The Ripon Forum · November/December 2005

million rons of hazardous waste China generates every year is tretted or ~-used. • Nearly 28 percent of C hina's landmass is denuded , the result of extensive logging and soil erosion. • Ha7.c from air pollution that blocks sunlight may be depressing China's nrm yidds by 5 to 30 percent. • 15 lO 20 percent of China's wildlife species a~ under threat of extinction.

In August 2004 Tlu Eco"omiSt reponed that air pollution in China contributes to an estimated 300,000 premature deaths annually from respiratory disease. In 2002. SEPA found that the air quality in almost two-thirds of the 300 cities it tested failed World Health O rgani7.ation standards. Government Response to Environmental Woes In reaction to these daunting environmental problems. in the 19805, the Chinese government began introducing environmenral laws and welcoming assistance from international NGOs as well as from bilateral and multilateral aid agencies. Their environmental legislation has quickly moved from a focus on command and control regulation to more progressive market incellljve laws. By the earl y 199Os, il became dor lO China's rop leaders Ihal. given the downsizing of the central governmelll and growing power of the local governments, they needt.'d hdp to address a broad range of emerging social and environmental ills and to keep local governments in check. The~fore, in 1994, the government passed regulations. which for the first time granted legal status to independent NGOs. Environmenral groups were the fiTS! to register and now form the largest sector of civil society groups in China. Most of these groups receive funding from U.S. foundations and environmental NGOs. By the late 19905, a handful of these NGOs--often in partnership with international NGOs.----became watchdogs of local government and industry, helped pollution victims get access 10 courtS, undertaken subtle lobbying of the govern mem, and worked to give rural communities the power 10 protect and manage their local resources. C hina accounted for around 10.8 percent of global energy consumption in 2004 (second in the world behind the United St.nes) and by 2020 the country could collsume up to 20 percent of world's The Ripon Forum · November/December 2005




"China's economIc miracle IS a myth smce . environmental degradation IS costing the country nearly 8 percent of its annual GOP." energy. The growing energy consumption is of particular importance {O the world given the composition of China's energy productio n. Around 70 percent of China's energy comes from coal (predominamly high sulfur coment), approximately 23 percelll from oil. 2 {O 3 percent rrom natural gas, and the rest from a combination of hydropower, nuclear, renewable, and biomass energy sources. Besides developing natural gas markers, the Chinese government hopes {O promote a more diverse energy mix through the incentives and market Im:chanisms required by the 2005 Renewable Energy Law. This new law includes provisions (0 enable China to utilizc renewable resources for 10 percent or the coumry's energy consumption by 2020 (This requirement for renewable energy in China is at a rate twice tile amount of the renewable portfolio that was ultimately stripped from the most recent U.S. energy law-a missed opportunity for U.S. leadership in this area). TIle growth in Chi na's energy suppl y over the past 20 years has been matched by

considerable efforts and investments 10 improve energy efficiency. According to estimates by L,wrence Berkeley National Labora{Ory, China's energy demand in the 19805 and 1990s may have grown al only half the pace of GOP-an unprecedented achievement for a developing coun try. How", over the past three yocs, energy use has grown fa5le r than GD I~ because Chinese industries arc still much less energy efficient than those in developed coumries and there has been a surge in au{O use. Car ownership in C hina trails the U.S. by a wide margin- with only 13 cars per 1,000 people in C hina as compared to 600 per 1,000 in the United Srares. However, si nce cars a~ becoming morc affordable (thanks to (he wro rarifT reductions) the number of vehicles on C hinese roads is rapidly increasing and will mOSt likely rise from 24 million today {O 100 million by 2020. Wilh car sales exploding, the Energy Information Administration estimates Ihal China's oil demand will reach 14.2 million bbl/day (billion bar~ls per day) by 2025,

A Beijing street IS filled With cars and peopla. The number of vehICles on a"lInese roads is rapidly Increasing and Will most likely rise from 24 million today to 100 million by 2020.


. Greening the Dragon: The Enllironmental

Fea t ure.

Costs of China's Economic Growth

with net imports of 10.9 million bbl/d:IY. This en boom has meal\( vehicle emissio ns have repla~ coal SOOt as the major source of ai r pollution in several major cities-according to official estimates. auto emissions will accounr for 79 pcrttnl of [Oul air pollution in China [his year.

In response to this

growing pollution problem, the government rapidly phased-oul of leaded gasol ine. imposed righter emissions srandards (rh:n

will reach the highest European srandaros by 2008), and adopted fud efficiency standards. These fuel efficiency standards art' so sirier lhal when fu lly implcmclHcd in 2007. 90 percent of lhe SUVs in use in the United States would not pass them. Despite measures ro increase energy efficiency and develop renewable energy sources, China will rem3 in d~ ndenr upon coal for the foreseeable future. This dependence, coupled with die low qualiry of much of the coal and the lack of widespread coal w:lshing fucilities and scrubbers at ind ustrial fucilities and power plants, has led to serious health problem.s :lf1d delerioralion of China's air quali!),. Respiratory disease is a leading caUS<" of death in China. Besides domeslic health problems. the burning of coal releases carbon dioxide-a greenhouse gas that colluibmcs to climate change-and Olher gases that lead to :Icid mi n, wh ich has been affecting a third of the country along with Korea and Japan. Coal burning in China also emits 25 percent of the global mercury. Another regional and global air concern is Ihe growing dusl SlOrms Ihat are caused by growing deserrifiCJlion in nonhern C hinad usl, which G ill carry othcr pollutants, Ius already begun ro r("Jch the western coast of the United States.

Missed Potential of U.S. Green Work in China While U.S. age ncies such a5 the Departmem of Energy. Environmental Protection Agency, USDA, Forest Service, as well as the national energy laboratories are engaged in environmental or energy work in C hina, their funding is extremely limited due to continuing congressional fCStrictions of fo rmal aid and assistance to China. T he San Francisco-based Energy Foundation grants given to Ch inese and U.S. NGOs and research centcrs, to promme energy efficiency in China, are greater than the rotal DOE budget in C hina. bck of budgets and high-level suppon for U.s. environmental and energy assistance has meant U,S. government environmental and energy projOCtS in Chi na are often uncoordinated, inconsistent, and 1I0t nearly as effective as similar wo rk conducted in other countries. The lack of a strong U.S. governmem presence in environ memal assis[;lnce h:ls also hurt U.S. business comperitivcness in energy efficiency and cnvi ronmental technology sales in China k.g" Japan and Germany with strong ~glttn a id~ programs caplUre 75 percem of the wastewater technology markel in C hina). In stark COntrast 10 the U.S. government presence, many U.S.~baS(..J NCOs, professional societies, and universities have been active in helping Chinese government agencies and NGOs work on a bro.1d range of energy and con.s<:tvation issues, Natural Resources Defense Cou nci l, WWF, ConselY.ltion International, Inrerll:u ional Crane Foundario n, American Bar Association, and Environmental Defense have long-term , effective programs, bUI could greatl y benefit from greater U.S.

government support, which many receive in thei r work in other countries. Such assistance could help promote the growth of civil society and citizen involvemelll in China by sHenglhening nongovernmental energy and environmelllal contacts between the United States and the PRe. The Bush administration and Congress have an unp recedented opportunity [0 develop a coherent approach to energy 3.nd environmental relations with China. On the American side, rhe war against terrorism will continue to require the U.S, government to engage C hi na so that it does not undercut U.S. effortS in cemral Asia, the Middle E.1st, or the Korean peninsula, Moreover, cooperating with China on energy and environmennl issues would help srrengthen U.S.-China ties, which are continually srrained by friction over Taiwan, trade imbalances, and a wide range of other issues. Indeed, str.uegic and other issues arc likely to continue to buffer the relationship, Thus, a concerted effort by the world's twO largest energy consumers to work together to solve their mutual energy problems and 10 develop a partnershi p to help China wilh itS pollution problems could build some dt'Sret' of confidence that helps the rel3.tionship weather tough rimes. h is strongly in the interest (politically and environmentally) of the United States to help China bolster itS lise of dean energy, energy efficiel1l technologiei, :l.Ild en~rgy conS<"rvation strategies in order 1'0 help pre\'~m intensified competition for limited global energy resources and fu rther envi ronmental dcgr:tdation in the PRe. Energy collabor:llion could d(.'Crease the likelihood of China becoming dependent on unstable oilrich statcs-Chinese oil companies already have acquired concession5 in Sudan, I~n , and ira(I' As rhe United States and Olina share concerns over energy securiry and ('onfrom many of the 5ame environ mental challenges, cememing cooperation in these 3.reas might offsct tensions in other pam of the rel3.tionship and may help secure broader U.S, foreign policy and domatic goals. C'i

- jm7lifn- L Turn" is tht Coorr/in(ltor of tht Chillli ElIlIironmmt lYman (It '''t W'oodrow Wilson IIltf'rnatiOIlfi/ emlt'r for Scholars ill Wfuhingtoll, DC Portions ofthis article 1Vn"r dmwn from a \'(/jlsoll en,," publicatiol/ Dr. Tum" did with Pamtla &tiding" titltd Crouching Suspicions Local children fish In a backwatef' surrounded by discarded ""bblsh In ShanghaI. The CIty. WIth 8 population of OVe!" 16 million. produces 6,5CX) tons of Industrial waste and 4 ,400 tons of Mlbbish and sewage dal~,



Hidden Potential: U.S. Environmental and Energy Cooperation with China, wbich is IWIlilnb/t at www.wiuollulltr:r.orglul The Ripon l=tJrum ' November/ December 2005








v ,


~ , .... ' "'~

1-., ...

Challenges and Opportunities for International Trade By Len Condon


he processed foods industry has a long history of looking abroad for new ma rkets and new custome rs. For example, rhe Coca-Cola Company launched their first overseas opera t ions in 1906 and Kraft Foods followed JUSt shortly after that in 1924 in Europe. AI that (ime, food companies had [0 locate facililies abro:!d 10 reach these markets. since both transportation costs and tariffs were prohibitively high and access 10 Taw mate rials was li m ited. Today we live in a very differe nt' world, wi t h l ccess to firs t class global distributio n and ab undant raw materia ls. Food companies, however, are still limited in thei r ability to access new market's by old world trade barriers thaI hinder our CXpO ri opponunities and Fragment glob:ll markets. Al though the multilateral trading system h:ls been in existence For over fiFty years, Food lnd agricultural products h3vl: only been subjecr to international rules and discipl ines For the last ten years. As a result, the barriers to t{,Jde in Food and agriculrural products remain staggeringly high when compared to those of their industrial counterparts. W hile tariffs on agricultural products arc high in general 62 percent, comp3rcd wirll a global average of <I percent For industrial products - tariffs on processed products tend to be even higher than their bulk ingredients. These high tariffs are largely a result of "tariff escalation,Mas countries try to protect local industries by increasing tariffs with the level of processing. For example, while most countries have no rariff on ra w cocoa be:lns, finished chocobte confectionary produns face rarifFs ra nging between 15 and 57 percent. Tariflication in the Uruguay Round also created a tariIT-rate quota (TRQ) system for many sensitive products (for example, sugar and dairy products) that arc important ingredients in many processed food productS. These TRQs restrict access to these key commodities, r:tising raw material COStS to many manufact urers. This impedes our :tbili ty 10 be globally competitivc in prod ucts that are high in The Ripon Forum ¡ November/December 2005

sugar or dairy content. Furt hermore, processed foods oflen f.1ce complex tariff Structu res ab road when countries nor only assess a duty on the product itself but on its ingred ients by weight and composit ion , making it almost im possible to predetermi ne the tariff on particular prod ucts, Fortunately, we have several opponunities to lower these trade barriers in the ncar future th rollgll a co mbination of fll ultiJater.ll and bilatcral trade negotiations. The World Trade Organization (WTO) Doha Round negoti:lIions are perhaps the most signiflc:ulI opportunity For global trade liberalization in a dec:lde. A1; President Hush recently noted in .1 speech beFore rhe UN, a successFul Doha Round could lift hundreds of millions of poor people out of poveny by substanrially liberalizing trade in agriculture, services a.nd indusuial goods. For the food industry, lhe successful concl usion of the WTO round could offer access to previously untapped new markets globally. It is important to realizc that increased processed food exports will clearly benefit the larger agricultural community. since they are essentially an export gateway for many bulk commodities. Last year, for example, olle processed Food manufacturer, Kraft Foods, purchased $3.6 billion worth of farm commodi ties for usc in its U.S. ITl:lnufacturing fac ilities, Th is included $1.3 billion worth of dairy products, nearly half a billion dollars worth of pork, and almost one quane r of a billion dollars worth of sugar. On a global basis, Kraft buys $7 billion worth of agricullUral commodities annually. As such, the more we can increase U.S. processed foods

exportS, rhe greater the gains for the whole agricultural com lTlunity. Food manufactu rers arc particularly interested in securing access to developing country markets sudl as India, where a growing middle class and rising incomes signal tremendous opportUnlttes For add it ional sales . For example, an nual growth rates for processtxl Food sales in developing countries are as high as 28% annually as opposed 10 JUSt 2 to 3% in developed countries. UnFortu nately, tariffs in Ind ia are some of the highest in thc wo rld. For example, thc allowed tariff on pasta in India is 150%, which effecti vely shuts out exports to the market. These Tariff 1~<1ks aPPC"Jr even more unjUSTified, when you consider that the average U.S, tariff on agricultural products is 12%. In the WTO. negotiators have pledged, in principle, 10 Mnd a Formula for ctl[ting rariffs in a manner that will cu t high tariffs FJSter than low ones. Such a Formula will assist food manufacturers by addressing rariff escalarion and, ideally, harmonizing tariffs to the already low U,S, rate, With any negotiation, however, the devil is in the details and negotiators are now locked in a struggle 10 determine the exact formula For ta riff curs that will provide maximum access abroad while at the same time protecring sectors in which they are sensitive, The level of success in lowering tariffs in the wro is directly related to the United States' will ingness to :lCcept reductions and new disciplines on ou r trade d istorting f:,rm supportS and the European Union's (EU) ability to open up their market to new imports. The Doha Round

"... the devil is in the details and negotiators are now locked in a struggle to determine the exact formula for tariff cuts ... " WW\V.


has been billed as a "development round," and as such, many developing cou ntries are looking to the U.S. and EU to lead on el iminating distortions to trade. These countries argue that they si mply can not compete with Western subsidies and will not lower their tariffs umil there are meaningful limitations on the use of domestic suppOrt. We sincerely hope this stalemate will be broken in time to achieve a deal on tariff formulas and domestic support reductions by the ne)(t wro ministerial meeti ng in Hong Kong this December. Failure to reach an interim deal will pm the whole wro negotiations at risk since the talks must conclude before the expiratio n of our Trade Promotion Authority in 2007. In parallel to this muhilateral trade liberalization, food manufacturers see great promise in our many new bilateral free trade agreements. For example, our exports have more than doubled to Mexico and Canada in the ren years since lhe North America Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) went into effecl. \'Ve estimate that upon

full im plemenrarion of the recem ly passed CAl-i A agreement, food exports could rise from $359 million to $662 million - an 84% increase over current exports to the region. Current negotiations with Panama, the Andean cou ntries and Thailand offer similar rewards, provided they are as comprehensive as the CArrA agreement. Calls 10 excl ude ceHam protcCled commodities fro m future free trade agreemclHs must not be heed..-d. Exclusions of products on the U.S. side lead !O demands for exclusions from our trading partners, damaging the prospects for our competi tive export-oriented sectors. Even if we are able to secure an am bitious outcome in rhe wro and bilateral negotiarions, these resul[s will be meaningless unless Congress passes the agreements inlO law. The recem fight over the CA l-i A agreement suggests that we need 10 rebuild the bipartisan consensus on the benefi ts of free trade. We are encouraged by the renewed intensiry of Congressional consultations by U.S. Trade Representative

Portman and Agriculture Secretary Johanns and hope that these consu ltations will crcate an enhanced negotiati ng mandate for USTR and USDA (Q conclude satisfactory agreemems for consumers, business and labor const ituents. ~ - Lrn Condon is the Director oflnternntionn/ Bttsintss Rtlntiom for Altria Corporau Services, Inc.

On the forefront of Republican politics and ideas V is it our Web s ite for information and tile latest news about tile Ripon Socie ty. \ V\ \/ \ v. ri I )O l l~( )('i('t y. (J r~

It's ca lled the GROWTH Act. And it can help the millions of Americans who own mutual funds outsi de of a retirement plan build a more secu re retirement. Under current law. investors must pay talles on annual ca pital ga ins distributed by their funds, even when they never sell a Single share a nd reinvest all of the gains back into the fund. This The Investment Company Ins titute is the naliono/ ossociotion of the U.S. mutuol fund industry. which monoges more than $8.4 trillion in assets an behalf at 91.3 million individuo/ shareholders.


makes no sense. Why pu nish investors who are striving to save for the long¡ term by fo rcing them to use part of those savings to pay talles each year, rather than when they actually sell sha res? That's no way to encourage retirement planning. The GROWTH Act will change that. It keeps money in mutua l funds working and lets savings grow by de ferring talles on

Visit our website ot

those gains until th e sha reholder sell s the shares. It's simple, it's fa ir, and it's part of


support the GROWTH Act, H.R.

the solu tion to the challenge of building a secure reti rement. Please write Congress to I NVEST MENT COMPANY I NSTITUTE-


and S.


at, where

we have more ideas on effective ways Americans can save for their fut ure.

The Ripon Forum ' NovernberlDe<ernber 2005

American Security Predicament on the Korean Peninsula By Joshua A. Lynch


hile the U.S. has exerted enormous foreign pressure in the Middle EaSt and in other pans of the world, it

has tabled any prospect for a morc far-reaching policy on North Korea's nuclear and missile arsenals. Instead, the U.S. has exerted a minimalist effort in a few ro unds of what ha\'c been called the sixparry talks. The results have been fruitless and have allowed North Ko rea to continue its nuclear program without conse<luence. Unfortunately, the fort h round of talks held in Beijing this past Sepl'cmber proved JUSt another exampl e of American reluctance to put serious pressure on North Korea 10 end its nuclear program. A joint declaration, signed on September 19 in Beijing, provides a framework for the future denuciearization of the Korean Peninsula in exchan ge for cnergy, economic aid, diplo matic recognit ion, and security assurances against a U.S. attack. However, a sober reading of the document and a historical understanding of Nonh Korea's deception and fai led negotiations should create greater skepticism than optimism. The moS[ rccem six-parry talks can only be imerpreted one way - as a success for the North Korean delegation 10 gain grea\"er concessions and an embarrassing failure by the U.S. 10 improve its own national securi ry interests. What the joint declaration drafted by the C hinese delegation really amoum5 10 is a framework for which rhe North Koreans can vent anti-Ame rican scntimcnts and connive greater concessions from the imernational comm unity. Typical of Nonh Korea's belligerent diplomatic behavior, only one day after the declarat ion was issued, the North Ko reans issued a demand fo r a light-water nuclear reaClOr. [n doing so, the North Koreans shifted the debate away fro m explaining how they would begin taking concrete steps roward rejoining the Non-Proliferation Treaty and allowing for Internat ional Atomic Enerb'Y Agency inspections into their isolated country. [t was a demand that nearly everyone in Washington thought was obsolere, settled and non-germane to the cur-

rem nuclear negotiations. But, it should have been predicted. Worse yet, the joilll declara tion left many other pressing questions unanswered and the nuclear StaniS of North Korea has taken on a dangerous and semiternal timetable. The declaration has been critici7.ed by some as a way of normalil'.ing the weapons program already existing in North Ko rea without getting guaran tees for an inrrusive ve rification of what and how many weapons Kim Jong II's govern ment holds. Policy makers here in the U.s., it seems, have not learned from the hislOry of the Agrecd Framework in 1994, whe re the U.S. offered a similar incentives package o nly 10 find Out that North Ko rea was

The Ripon Forum ¡ November/December 2005

A nuclear faclhty In Yongbyon, North Korea IS seen in thiS OlgitalGiobe satellite image taken on September 29 , 2004.

cheating on the agreement by creating highly enriched uranium. Need less co say, the Bush admi nistration has caught a casc of hislOrical amnesia with regard to its North Korea policy. The latest curve ball for a ligill-water reaclOr last thrown by Pyongyang should be cause fo r rising anxiety in WashinglOn. The internatio nal community should have picked up o n the negative signal sent in July by the North Korean leadership when they den ied a South Korean offer of assiSlance in the form of 2 million kilowam of electricity lO end ils nuclear program . According lO the Congressional Resea rch Service, that is enough elecrricity 10 satisfy the electric demand of Washington, D.C., and is


equivalent to the energy created by twO light- water nuclear reactors, an amount th:\( couldn't even be abso rbed by North Korea in the shon-term. Non h Korea's abnormal decision-making only reinforces its true intentions behind openly becomi ng the ninth Iluclear slale. Coincidently, Nonh Korea's decision to assume peaceful nuclear power has been championed by the C hinese government. At this point, China is estimated to provide about 70 percell( of North Korea's total energy. According to a report in 1999, given by then Secretary of Defense William Perry: "On average Ch ina has provided close to one million tons of unmonitored and unconditional food aid to the North per year and has urged the United States and Japan no r to create 'artificial' tensions with the Nonh over missiles ... China was eit her unable or unwilling !O dissuade the North from tes ting further missiles. lkijing maintai ns that it discouraged Pyongyang from steps that undermi ne regional stability btl! argues that missile development is a sovereign North Korean right." C hina's ability ro CUt off resources and poli tical rcl:uions to the brutal nation highlights its strategic influence over the future of Kim Jong Irs nuclear program. yet the C hinese insist it does not have the right or power to dissuade No rth Korea's activity. It has been observed that the Russians, Sout h Koreans, and the C hinese have taken a more risk-adverse position with North Korea. For China and Russia at least, this could be interpreted as a strategic plan to

put toget her a prepackaged dilemma on President Bush's desk in order to deter the U.S. from direcdy focusing on C hina's rise as a com petitive military rival on rhe imernational stage. Nicholas Ebersradt of the American Enterprise Insti lUte writes, ÂŤUnder such thinking, the essential importance of countering U.S. international power ("uni polarity") dictates the maki ng of trade-offs and the taking of risks tha t would not seem to make sense in a less America-phobic calculus." What might be of greater concern is (hat other revolutionary regimes such as Iran, Syria, and Venezuela are imitating North Ko rea's behavior, T hese countries would prefer, if they had the opportunity, to reform the whole structu re of the international system as it exists today. The trouble is that these countries will all soon have the means to reshuffie the global system, via WMDs, if North Korea isn't successfully disarmed in the near furure. North Korea has relied on a cunning methodology to gain these weapons wim greal COSIS, suffe ring from a massive fam ine and poor human rights for decades. It can only be expected rhat North Korea would sell its nuclear secrets, as they do with their missiles, to anyone will ing to pay for them, includi ng to terronst groups. Given the uncovering of a global underground nuclear ma rket last year involvi ng No rth Korea's participation, it wo uld be a likely scenario ifNonh Korea became the most dange rous nuclear wholesale exporter of the 21 5t Century. The Nnrth Korean nuclear program does more than cre:ne great risks fot the U.S. Its ultimate purpose serves other goals as well. Foremost, North Korea recogniled afte r the Cold War, its conventional

"The international community should have picked up on the negative signal sent in July by the North Korean leadership when they denied a South Korean offer of assistance in the form of 2 million kilowatts of electricity to end its nuclear program." 20


military would not have the SUppOTt of the Soviet um brella. Wit h an ('(;onomically vibrant South Korea, strongly allied with me U.S., the North did not want to lose polirical control to the South . Today those weapons pose an existential threat to the South Korean population. T his particular nuclear program has res ulted in great domestic human sufferi ng as resources were redislributed from rhe people 10 the arsenal. Second, nuclear weapons have proven to be an excellent tool of eXlOnion. Some estimates have the U.S. spending over I billion dollars in bribes 10 the North Korean government; much of Ihat money was likely channeled ri ght back into the nuclear program. To solve this problem now, the U.S. shou ld SCt the conditions of talks with the North Koreans, Mainly, the U.S. ought to get concrete evidence of North Korea's peaceful intentions. For example, the U.S. would suggest that the North Koreans disarm a percentage of the artillery currently aimed al Seoul. ThaI is something which could be verified and would have;1 positive impact in the 11L"!;oriarions, North Korea could allow more imernational observers into the country and allow refugees to freely migr:ne to South Korea without harassment. Most importantly, the U,S. needs 10 verify the com plete and irreversible nuclear disarming of the regime wit h freedom of mspe([lon. The U.S. must back up its demands with a cred ible mi litary threat if no n-compliance ensues. While the com of carrying out this strategy (and potentially using military force against a dange rous foe) may seem high, the cost of not solving the nuckoar prol iferation pred icament in Nonh Korea will certainly prove to ne morally bankrupt when disaster resuhs. As Ronald Reaga n once said, ~Trus t , but Ve rify. ~ Greater counterproliferalion measures will be needed as they are the only means of verification in th is new era where, like it or not, rcvolutionary regimes have proven to be noncompliant to the rule of imernational law. \;7

- joshua A. Lynch is a 22 ytar-old wriltr in D. C. Ht is from Waddington, Ntw York and gmduHltd from St. WwrenCf Univtrrity in 2005. Ht WIlS ruoKn;ud by his university last spring with tht' $tmlUel johnson Bibliography Award for bm stf/ior honorr thesis for his rhtsis work 011 1It1e1tar lIoll-proli{rratioll ill North Korea. The Ripon Forum ' NovembcrfOttembc:r 2005






1 --..::...;.

The Struggle For Energy Independence By U.S . Representative Ralph Hall

nergy is ,he lifeblood of our coumry.


The stturity of our nation and economy largely depend upon it. For years we have recognized relying on other countries for lhe bulk of our energy needs places America at risk. Various proposals were introduced over several Congresses {hat would PUt America on a course for more energy independence. Those c(fon s paved the way for passage of the Energy Policy Act 0(2005, H.R. 6, which was signed into law by ,he PresidclH on August 8.

The Energy Policy Act of 2005 is designed to improve our country's energy outlook in all sectors. Spe<.:ifically, the bill addresses rising gasoline prices and our

dependency on foreign oil.

It also boosts

produCiion and impOn;ltion of dean natural gas, improves our nation's electriciry transmission capacity and reliability to prevent future blackouts, promotes dean and renewable fuels, requires greater energy conservation , and encourages more nuclear and hydropower product ion. I h:lVe always strongly fdt we need 10 open more Ame rican land and water to drilling for oil and natural gas:. Enhanced domestic production would increase independence from foreign sources and give our citizens a hreak from the high prices of gasoline and natural gas. Not only are higb prices a direct hit to individuals, but they also affect the ability of busi nesses to func[ion within a budget that keeps products affordable to all Ame ricans. Too ma ny businesses arc moving overseas where the energy COSts are lower and they aren't coming back. We necd t'O begin implementation of the Energy Policy Act as soon as possible. A good place to start is with my UltraDeepwater and UnCon\'entional Onshorc Research and Dl'Vdopmcl1l Program. My purpose for introducing this legislation was to enhancc the abili[y of the Depanment of Energy (DOE) to conducr well-funded, multi -year, resource-based naHlrai gas and oil R&D activities in order to accelerate the development of new technologies and increase domestic natural gas and oil production in the tlt"af and mid-teflll. This new program is intended ro compleme nt The Ripon Forum ' November/December 2005

U.S. Representative Relph Hall

the work of the DOE and allow the current Oil and Natural Gas Program to focus its o ngoing effons on solving the more basic production :Hld environmc mal issues that hinder our ability to increase product ion and transilion 10 a hydrogenbast.-d energy system in die longer term. This is a public-private venmrc. Funds furnished by Ihe Federal government will be replen ished Ihrough royalties from rhe program. The program will be awarded by 3. competitive bid. The Ultra-Deepwater and Unconven tional Onshore Resea rch and Development Program hali oc-cn designed to fosler (he development of additional natural gas from rhe vaSI resources of technically recove rable natural gas in the Unit<:d States. The 2003 N3.tional Petroleum Counci l study on namral gas estimated that there are 1,969 trillion cubic feel (Tcfl of technically recovef:lble natural gas reserves in North Americ l - equivalcm 10 90 yea rs of gas supply al CUTrem rales of consumplion. The continental 48 Slates conrain 1,240 Tcf. about 56 years of supply, of which only aboUI 2 10 T cf arc unavailable to be developed due to moramria or other restrictions. Opening a portion of the Alaska National Wildlifc Refuge (ANWR) to drilling would also help meet our energy

needs. According 10 the Energy Department, me coasral plain is rhe "largest unexplored , poremially onshore basin in the United S[al'es." The U.S. Gt.'Ological Survey estimates there are up to 16 billion barrels of recoverable oil there - enough to offiCI all Saudi imports for the nexi 30 yea rs. Moreover, oil could be developed in ANWR as soon as three years from rhe first lease sale. Conse rvalion is another importam compone11l that would help drive down costs. The Energy Policy Act is a start in that directio n. We need to help empower cili7.ens to become an imegral pan of the solmion by doing all they can 10 conserve energy at home and in their travel. The recent hurricanes further exposed our Nation's energy vulnerabilities. T he Energy and Commerce C omminec responded 10 this crisis by passing H.R. 3893, the Gasoline for America's Securi ty (GAS) Act of2005, which will be VO ted o n by the full House on O ctober 7 . The GAS Ael encourages the construction of new refineries 10 increase supply and add ress soaring gasoline prices, limirs "boutique fuels" that have propped up gasoline prices by artifi cially limiting suppl y, promotes new pipelines to gCl c rude oil a nd refin ed product to consu mers at lowe r prices, prOmOtes conservation through carpooling, and bans price gougi ng in gasoline and d iesel fuel sales. It is my hope that this bill will be signed into law. T he world runs Oil ene rgy. Nations ha ve fought wars over e ne rgy. It is imperative that we do all we can to help meet America's energy needs through the impleme ntation of a comprehensive national energy strategy. We mUSl cominue to work with other countries 10 develop policies that will mect thc increasing demand for e ne rgy throughout the world. CS


U.S. R(pmmttlfi~ Ralph Hall is in ;'is 13t" UTm "pmmring ,"( ptopl( of 7exas' 4lh diuTi(l. H~ Units on ,ht HOltS( Commituts Off Sci~ffct ilnd Entrgy (md COm mtTct.


A Moment of Choice: Republicans and Immigration By Tamar Jacoby oe of the longcst.running and most intense interneci ne Republican quarrels seems finally 10 be coming 10


a head. The debate over immigration reform is beginning in earnest - and with it. potentially, a bruising batlle for the soul of the Grand O ld P:m y. After nea rly twO yea rs of silence on immigration. the White House has been

holding a series of high-bel briefi ngs for members of Congress, m:limaining, even in the wake of Katrina, that it wants (0 mo\'C' ahead this fall with a guest worker program. Both form er Majority Leader Tom DeLay and his replacement, Roy Blunt , have disscntcd sh:uply. tdling :my repon er who asks that they think Congress should Start by shoring up the border - deferring a guest

worker program, perhaps indefinitdy. Speaker lftnnis H asten has so far ducked the conflict, saying only that he wants 10 move ~some type of immigr:lIion legislation. " BUI public press ure is building, and it will only gCt worse in the months lO comC'. Unlike in the past, when Congress hesirated to lOuch this third-rail issue, today, many members fear going home to mee voters without moving to reassc::rt control of the border and restore the rule of law. The White House and others who mvor a broader refo rm mce an uphill battle, lO put it mildly. JUSt las t momh, some of the country's leading conscrvative think ranks and grassrooLS campaigns partnered their efforrs lO send out a letter aski ng readers for help in blocki ng a package of the kind the President is proposing - a guest worker progra m plus enhanced enforcement plus some anS\\'tr for the 1 J millioll illegal immigranrs already in the country. Add Fox News and the WashinglOn Times, also "ehemently opposed, and yo u ha ve almost the entire conservative establishment. As for Congress, the tiny handful of members who endorse the White House app roach is d ....'arfed by a vocal caucus clamoring for Dd..ay's ~enforce ment fi rst" strategy. So why are Republican reformers in the Whit'e House and elsewhere pressing ahead? Wh:II '5 in it for them, or for the party? Act ually, a greal deal. Not only is immigration reform of the kind the President and


"It isn't just about "them" - the foreigners coming to help man our economy - it's about "us": our values and our identity as Americans." his allies, particularly in the Scn3H.', art: pressing for the only effective way 10 take control of the border. [t's also good politics - and a rare opportunity for the GOP to burnish a broadly appealing legacy. Of cou rse, reform wi ll help Republicans with cwo key constituencies business and Hispanics. (And snicker as opponenrs do. it's hard 10 Stt what's so wrong with a political party thinking politically.) But ultimately what's at stake is more than JUSt buying votes in the short term. In deciding which way to go on immigration. RC'publicans will be making a SCt of fu r larger choices abou t what they wa nt to stand for O\'C'T the 10llg haul. Is or isn't the GOP the party of prosperi ry? SurC'. a guest worker program would be a boon for busi ness - but that hardl y means bad for American workers. In mcl. reform of rhC' kind the President has in mind wo uld strengthen law-abiding employe rs at the expense of their unscrupulous, exploita. tive competitors. And at a time when sweeping demographic change is transforming the native-born labor force, a broader package would provide critical oxygen for U.S. economic growth, nOt JUSt allowing millions of businesses - in agriculture, food processing, hospitality, health care and construction [0 gain lawful access to thC' workers they need 10 stay afloat. but also sustaining orner companies and communities that depend on these employets. Then the re's the matter of security. Republicans who favo r an enforcement-first or, more severe still , enforcC'ment -onl y approach talk a lot abou t security. as if [hey were the only people who carC'd about American lives. But in fua, merely cracking down on [he border would not come dose to delivering the securi ty we need in an age of international terrorism. II would do nothing to eliminate the vas t undC'rground world currently inhabited by 11 million illegal immigranrs - the perfect hiding place for the few foreigners with intent to do us

harm. And because it would provide no legal channels for the foreign workers we need to emer [he Country, it would aU but guarantee a continued illegal influx. with all of the risks [hat come with it. Enforcement alone might fed like control, but umil we change the law 10 make it more realistic and enforceable - until we pass immigr.nion qUOtas more in line with our changi ng labor nC'("ds - even the most draconian buildup will only drive the flow further underground , not solving [he problC'm but mC'rely pushing it OUt of sigh!. And that more than anything is what's at issue here. Are Republicans me parry of sw;agger and sound bites - o r the party thai delivers with sol utions? ATe we a party [hat can adapt [0 ch:lIlging circu mstances - global labor markers. an aging workforce, an incrC'aSingly bifurcated high- and low-wage service economy - or a parry that sticks its head in the sand and pretends {he r\."enty-first century isn't here yet? Will the GOP lC'ade rship go on denyi ng the counrry's labor needs - or will it recogni7.e and accommodate them, allowi ng government 10 make. provision for the consequC'nces, including at local schools and hospitals? Will we as a parry pander 10 prejudice and xenophobia - or will we come up wilh an anS\\'er for the vast majority of Americans who aren't ami-immigrant, juS! determint.'d 10 rerake control of the border and restore the rulC' of law in thC'ir communities? Today as in the past, fCY.¡ issues say as much about who we are as a nation as our approach 10 immigration. It isn't JUSt aboUi "thC'm" - the foreignC'rs coming 10 help man our C'Conomy - it's about "Wi" . our valuC5 and our identiry as Americans. Republicans will face a choice. in the months to comC', and it will resonate, for better or worsC', far into the future. C7


Tamar jacoby is a rrnior ftffofl) (1/ the Mflnhlltt(1I/ Institute.

The Ripon Forum ¡ November/December 200S

Six Principles of Comprehensive Immigration Reform By U.S. SenalOf John Cornylt



is no longer


question of whether we

will reform our immigrlllioll laws, but

rather when and how. '111erc has Ix.~ n a }O pc'fCCIH increase in illegal immigration since 2000, and there arc an estimated 10 [Q 12 mill ion undocumcntl"(l workers current· Iy in the United St3les. A recelll repon by

the Pew Hispanic Center that illegal immigration exceeds Icg:11 immigration. Most alarmingly, information suggests terrorists and other criminals are aware of the holes in our system and may look 10 exploit IhCSt' wrunc:ssc:s. Below J Olltline principles of cornprchcnsi\'c immigration reform that arc based on the rule of law, Fair treatment of all immigrants. and the need for both cnforccmcllI and improved avenues for legal immigration.

Principle # 1: Regain Control of the Borders The trUlh is that we ha\'e not devoted the fun ds. resources, or manpower to enforcc our immigration laws or protcct our borders. Regaining control ovcr the immigration SyStCl11 starts by controlling thc border. We must au thorize addirional CtI5toms and Border Prott'Clion officers and additional funds for camerAS. sensors. and lHll11anncd aerial vehicles. We must also find ways to streamline the removal or aliens apprehended along the border. Reducing the number of days that cach alien is derained prior to remov:11 will maximize use of our limitt'(\ resources: ,Ielention bc:ds. facilities, and dctention officers.

Principle #2: Remove Criminal Aliens Already in the U.S .

aliens while they arc still serving time in state and local jails. Another way 10 make better use of our resourcC$ is to allow for state and local police - voluntarily - to assist federal officials with enforcement or immigration laws.

Principle #3: Eliminate the Magnet of Illegal Employment For decades, e:<perts from both political parties have concluded that the si ngle most effccti ve way lO reduce iIIeg.1.1 immigration is to remove (he magnet of illegal employmelll. Despite years or conscmus, current employment \"erificarion laws are unworkable and unenforceable. An employer must review some combination of 27 differelll documents to determine whether a nC"oY worker is legal. Document fraud and idemi lY thert have contributed to the problem, making it easier for unscrupulous employers to look the other way :md hire unauthorized workers. While i[ may be counterintuit;\'e to some. the answer is to make it easier, not tougher, on employers: a simple electronic verification system would provide immediate confirmation of whether a worker is legal. Ir a merchant can swipe a card to dctermine wht;:ther a credit card \lumber is valid , certainly thc fceleml government aUl develop a system that allows employers to \'erify whether a new hire is authorized to work.

Principle #4: Support and Improve Legal Immigration

We must also strengthen interior enforament and ensure that crimitlal aliens are identified and deporlt-d. Right now, there are close to 500.000 absconders aliens who were order«! deported and n('\'er lert the U.S. - and lens of thous:lI1ds of them are criminal aliens. We must nOl only increase the number of agenlS, but we must authori7.c the detention beds. trial altorneys, judges and facilities tim make the removal process fun ction. One approach is to expand a program that identifies cri minal

Immigration reform must further the goals of America and serve \Ill;': nt-oos of our economy. The vast majority or undocumented workers come 10 the U.S. 10 fill jobs that U.S. workers arc unavailable to fill. and we must provide secure, workable avenues to ellter me country. We must welcome legoll immigrams, and shut the door on those who st:ck to do us harm or yiolate our laws. [t is time for a new temporary visa category that allows foreign workers to enter the country for a short period of dme and then requires the worker 10 return horne. [t should create financial incentives for circular

The Ripon Forum ' Noyembc:r/Dcccmbc:r 2005

U 5 Senator Jottn Cornyn

migration, including a temporary worker investment fund that vestS only when the worker returns to his or her home country. Most importantly, it must be workable: currel1l visa categories are burdened with onerous governmelll regulations and requirements and do nOt reflect the realities or the workplace and the modern econom y.

Principle #5 : Transitioning Undocumented Workers into a Legal Status While the vast majority of undocu· memed workers come 10 me U.s. solely to provide for their fami lies, they should not be rewarded with a difTerem. easier path to a green card and citizenship. Doing so is a disservice to legal immigrants who follow the law and will only lead to illegal immigration in ),ears to come. Under current law, however, illegal aliens who lea\'e (he coumry arc ineligible to reenter for up 10 \0 years. A fair and Tt'asonable sol ution is to lirt those legal bars £0 reemry and then grant non-criminal, undocumenwd wo rkers a period of time tip 10 five years - in which 10 depart and


of Comprehensive Imml' ratl'on Forum'• SixImmlPrinciples rallDn Reform rcmrn in legal status. During that five-year period, they should be able to work and tra\ocl, so there would be no disruption 10 businesses or families. When they depart. they should Ix immediarely eligible to return o n a temporary worker visa (including the new visa category we must create) or, if eligible, on a green card. A recent Pew Hispanic Survey study showed that ap proximately 80 percent of undocumented workers would sign up for the program - not surprising when yo u consider that undocumented workers around the count ry go to work every day without the protection of U.S. laws, fearful that they could be deponed :1.1 any time.

nale those burdens in the first place. One way w address the holth care COSlS would be w requi~ all tC'mporary worker.! {O have a

minimum level ofhca!th insurance coverage, which could be provid~ by the coumries ,hal send workers or by emplo~rs who choose to provide such coverage.



Immigration reform ultimately must be about improving legal immigration, not about creating a new process that only benefits illegal aliens. If all immigrants must abide by the rule of Jaw and are treated equally, then we can reach a consensus on ways to improve the legal process so that it

Thank you to Ihe many dedicated men and women of the armed forces who proudly serve to protecl our country.

meets the needs of socicry, the economy. and

Principle #6 : Addressing the Costs of Illegal Immigration For far roo long, the COStS of illegal immigration have fallen on our state and local law enforcement agencies. Meanwhile, hospitals face immense financial burdens because of un - re imbursed care. Immigration reform must not only reimburse state and local .agencies for the costs they incur, but it must find ways to elimi-

our national security. ~


Us. Sm. John Cornyn, R-Tnms, is Chainnan oftlu Smatt Judiciary ummitttt's Immigration, &rd" 5«urity alld Citiullship subcommitttt. Earli" this ~ar, IN imroducrd tlu ump"'u1/Si~ £nformnmt and Immigration &fonn Au of 2005, II billllHlI will "110" inltgrity 10 tlu immigration ty1lttn.

And thank you to each family member at home for your support.

Working with our over one million members to bring home a strong economy. • Worki ng to pass legislation that protects consumers from banking conglomerates trying to take over local real eslate. • Supporti ng the Small Business Health Fairness Act allowing small businesses and the self employed to obtain affordable health insurnnce coverage. • Advocati ng the Afforda ble Housing Tax Credit to help more Americans make their dream of homeownership a reality.

m U3 "ALLO~·


Of REAlTO?S· 1he \obJoe 101 RealEIIoN·

"or more: ;nformal;on .;s;t ..........


The Ripon Forum · NovcmbcrfDcccmbcr 2005

1', \SS 1'0 RT •

( JIll,




tI \till, \

0/,111/('1 I, 1/

It's Time to Secure America By U.s. Representative Jim Kolhe s a young child growing up on a canle ranch in sOUlhcastcrn Arizona, illegal immigration was a fact of life, but a mi nor irritant. But it was a simpler time. [n that era the border population was spa rse, and entering the United States ent ailed nothing more tha n crawling through a three-strand barbed wire fence. not unlike the fence we used to separate our canle paslUfcs. Occasional illegal immigrams would wander through the ranch, be given a meal and water to drink and sent on their way. T he Border Patrol was usually called, but the number of :lgents covering a 100 mile stretch of border could be COUIl(cd on the fingers of tW O hands, so they rarely showed up ill a timely ['\Shion. But times have changed. Today, Mex ican border cities are tt"eming with populations that seek the higher wages of maquiladora plants and the dream of getting to the United States. Thousands of I!order Patrol agents swarm along the U.S. side of the border, aided by elt'Ctronic sensors, vehicle barriers, night vision goggles, helicopters and fixed wing aircraft and t-ven unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs). O n the other side, smugglers possess equally sophisticated equipment, communicating with SCOUtS using cell phones and two-way radios, watching the movements of the Border Patrol with their own night vision devices, and are padded with rolls of one hundred dollar bills. The going rate for being smuggled into the United Stales ra nges from $2,500 to as much as $5,000, and the ~contract" promises at least three trlCS at crossing. lI1egal immigration has become a growth industry on both sides of the border. Simply stated, our currem system of border enforcement is out of step with reality. It allows law-breakers to flourish and profit from their criminal activities. We must replace our broken immigration sYStem with a new system - one that Strengd lens our economy, punishes lawbreakers, and saves lives. T he legislation I have introduced with Representatives Jeff Flake (R-AZl and Luis Gutierrez (D-IL) is based on one simple premise: Our cmirc immigration system is broken and requires a thorough overh:lUl. Band-aids and panial solutions won't work any longer.


Thc Ripon Forum ¡



O ur bill, dubbed the Secure America Act, em braces this comprehensive approach in three areas, like a three-legged Stool. The firs t leg is improving border securiry. We have already increased the num ber of Border Patrol agents and given them more tOols to help them do their jobs. We even have the military providing suppOrt alo ng the border. But we need to do mo re. We need even more Border Patrol agents on the border, and we mUSt increase the use of technology like UAVs, fixed wing ai rcraft, hel icopters, sensors, lighting. and watch lOwers. However, strengthening enforcement on the border is nOI enough. The past decade has taught us a hard lesson. Just ten years ago, there was only a tenth of the number of Border Patrol agents as there are in the Tucson Sector today. We have quintupled the Border Patrol's budget, rethought their taerics, and overhauled the arsenal of high-tech equipment at their disposal. H as i[ made a difference? Yes. h has made it much more difficult to cross the border, and thus made it more costly measured by both hu man suffering and money. But it has not stopped the flow of people coming into the United States. Illegal immigration has remained at roughly the same levels, or highcr in some areas like Ariwna. Thus, the second leg of the stool is employer enforcement - creating a fool proof, easy to use system of documenration verification tha t workers and business alike elll actually use. T hen we must enforce the law with businesses that don't comply by hiri ng or abusing illegal workers; and we must deport foreign workers who do not come into rhe cou ntry legally. To make rhis work, we must establish a system of counterfei t resistant doc umentS so employer and employee can know they establish a valid right to employmcnt. The current system is so prone to fraud that a business owner can't be e){pected to know if a doculllent is counterfeit, and even if they do, the Depart ment of Labor usually can't prove 11. The Secure America Act calls for till' creation of the Employment Verification System. T his electronic program will utilize rhe tamper- resistant, biometric,

U,S. RepresentatNe Jim Kolbe

"Our entire immigration system is broken and requires a thorough overhaul. Band-aids and partial solutions won't work any longer." machine-readable identity documents, which will be verified when a temporary worker begi ns and finishes a job, making it easier for employers to know who is authorized 10 work in the U.S. Noncompliance should not be an issue with such :1 system. The third and final leg of the stool is the most conrroversial, but it is absolutely essential to success. It involves the creation of a sensible, temporary worker program. The Secure America Act creates twO visa categories - one for foreign workers wishing to come to the U.S., and one for those who are already here illegally. The first visa - for those living outside the U.S. - allows businesses to hi re someone from places like Mexico or Honduras when no one in the U.S. is willing or available to fill the job. To obtain this visa, the foreign worker must


. FDrum: Secure II's lime to Imml. ration America pay a $500 processing fee and pass security background checks and medical tests. The worker will (hen receive a visa valid fo r three years that may be used fo r any work in t he Unilcd States. The Secure America Act also c reates a visa which the current illegal population can obtain (0 give them temporary legal status withi n the U.S. But because they broke the law in coming to the Uni ted Stales ini tially, they must first pay a $1,000 fine and a fee to obtain the visa. T he worker would be required 10 hold the temporary work visa for al least six years before they co uld pay another $1,000 fine to be allowed to self-petition for permanent reside nce. Otherwise, they must return to their home cOlin try. ES[ahlishing a legal channel for workers to emer lhe U.S. allows lhe Border Palrol to focus on lhe I % of people crossing who migln be drug smugglers. human traffickers, or terrorists. T he other 99% of the people crossing today come in for purely economic reasons. Finding the I % that are cri minals in a sea of people comi ng in for work is like maki ng the


"Enforcement, coupled with increased technology and a common sense guest worker program will bring results." Border Patrol look for a grai n of sand on the beach. The guest worker provision in our bill modernizes the law and will improve ollr abiliry to catch the Teal lawbreakers. Enforccmenr, coupled with increased tech nology and a common sense guest worker program will bring results. This comprehensive approach is rhe key to success. One thing is cenaill: if we try to bu ild (he stool widl on ly one leg - or even (WO legs - it will fa ll over, jllst as the immigration "stOol" known as SimpsonMal-lOli fell over af!(~r irs passage in 1986. Over (he paSl few years, border secuTity and immigralion reform has been a responsibil ity of all members of Congress, but a priority for only a few. The tide is changing. Border securiry is a top priority

fo r all Americans now. We cannOt wait any longer - (he time to aCI is now. I look to lhe day when everyone that lives along lhe border wi ll enjoy security in their homes and peaceful imeraclion with their neighbors. Then, we will look back o n the laSt few years and wonder why we didn't solve th is problem sooner. <::7

- Repmt1ltlltive Jim Kolbe is urvillg his e!rvrmh trnn ill the Ullitrd Stlltrf flouse of Reprrsmtlltives. "prrsrn/illg the prople of Arizolla! Eighth COllgrmiollal District, which includes most ofTucsoll, eastrrn Pima County, all of Cochise COllllty alld parts of Pinal and Santa Cruz Coulllies. fir urVrf 011 the House SubcommiU('f 011 flomela"d Security, Imd is CO-llI/tbor ofthe 2005 StcU" AmeriCfl Act.

The Ripon Forum ¡ NovemberfDe<:embcr 2005

Squeezing the Immigration Balloon By U.S. Representative Kay Granger


e have recently experienced one of the wo rst natural disasters in U. S. history - HurriClne K:nrina ;md irs aftermath. J serve on {he Select BiparTisan Commincc to Investigate rhe Preparation and Response to Hurricane Kurina. O UT mission is to separate fact from fiction, exaggeration and d isTOrtion. We will call witnesses who helped de termine the coursc

of the storm and those who lived through that delayed and torturous evacuation. From what we have seen and heard so far,

there werc heroic deeds and miserable missteps. There will be much finger point~ ing and blaming; bU(, hopefully, we will come out wiTh an accurate account and a blueprilH for fumre responses. There is one heavy question that never

leaves the mi nds of those of us asking the questions. It is the question that came (0 the minds of most people as mistakes were made, time was lost and property destroyed. That question is - how far have we come in our res ponse (0 disaster from September II, 2001, (0 Katrina? PoS[ 9/1 I, Congress and the Bush Adminisrration embarked on the largest restructuring of the federal government since the New Deal. I sat on the House Appropriations Subcommim.'t' that oversawall funding levels for the newly created Department of Homeland Security, and also served on the Select Committee on Homeland Security. Those committees immediately began ro do just what we are doing after Katrina, examining what we could do differemly, what needed "fixing." And I believe we made some significaIH improvements. Since 9/11, Congress has increased overall funding for homeland security by more than 50 percent. T he most significant improvements were addressed at our airports and on our planes - reinforced cockpit doors, metal detectors, lnd increased air marshals, (0 name a few. We have beefed up our intelligence network worldwide and (Om down barriers in communication and law enforcement. We have given new (and controversial) tools for detection and surveillance. Where we have f.1.lIen down on the job is the issue of immigration. When addressing the disaster of The. Ripon Forum ' November/December 2005

Katrina, we will look hard at the response. We can look at strengthening Ihe protection for areas sensitive to weather, levees and such. But we cannot do much to keep a hurricane from happening. Mother Nature does what Mother Nature does. BUI on September 11, 2001, 10 oCthe 19 terrorists were in the United States outside of legal status - either overstaying their authorized period of time or entering this country illegally with the intent to do us harm. They succeeded because we were nOl enforcing our immigration laws and taking our laws seriously. This, unfortunately, is still the issue. Our citizens are very aware that people are sti ll enteri ng our country illegally, staying here long after their visas have expi red, and costing us billions because of the services we extend to them. Immigration is a complex issue that has often been compared to sq ueezing a balloon - squeC"LC one area, and another area expands. With cu rrent figures showing over II million illegal workers in rhe United States. America can no longer afford 10 ignore this emergi ng crisis. Not only is the issue multi-layered and d ifficult 10 solvc, but rhe re is also great disagreement about the best way to address rhe problem. The fundamental immigrarion issues arc: border securiry, temporary and/or long term guest worker programs, interior enforcement and healthcare costs.

Border Security Reigning in the flood of illegal immigrants crossing ou r borders every year, especially in lieu of tile 9-11 terrorist attacks, is a tough job and is also one the government has taken steps ro improve. After the September 11,2001 terrorist attacks, Congress acted immediately by adding 1,000 more border patrol agents. Last year, Congress provided fu nding for 1,500 more border control agems. This year, we allotted $180 million for hi ring an additional 1,000 border patrol agents. These additional border patrol agents shou ld be used to reinforce areas of need. The task before the border panol is immense, so we must use these resources in the most efficient manner. The mayor of Eagle Pass, Texas,

U.S. Representative Kay Gnanger

laments that 200 Other Than Mexicans (OTMs) invade his ciry each day. The Department of Homeland Securiry's policy of processing OTMs and releasing {hem with orders to appear in Court at a later date has made a mockery of our border security. While many arc crossing the border to work and return regularly to sec {h eir families. o thers arc bringing in illegal drugs at a disturbing rate; the gangs and drug cartels on the border have resulted in alarmingly flSlng crime activities. Nuevo Laredo's violence caused over 100 murders this year. Along with more agents, technology must be employed to secure ou r borders. This year, the Deparunent succeeded in com pleting installation of ALL border patrol srations with fingerprint systems. All apprehensions are now checked thro ugh bmh of these databases resul ting in significantly more criminal hits and potential to detain terrorist suspeCtS with latem prints. Another important initiative is the US-VISIT program, an automated entry and exit data system that would track the arrival and departure of every al ien. This system is now operating at 115 ai rports and the 50 largest land border crossings. There are 30 million people enrolled in US-VIS IT, and over 700 individuals have been prevented from entering the United States due to hi[5 in the system.




Imml ratIOn Forum: While: we've: made progress. much more needs (0 be done:. TwentY-Iwo

Members of the Texas ddeg:uion . myself included . recen tly sent a bipartisan Icuer 10 Presidelll Bush 10 outline OUf concerns aboul Ihe state of emergency with Texas's immigration system. The Depanmem of

Homeland Security sen! border patrol officers from the l has border to the Tucson sector in Aril.Ona. We demanded these 165 agents return to T(:l[;lS 10 ensure our border is not fUrl her crippled. CurrcllI ly, tWO pieces of legislation being proposed that address the border securi ty problems are the Corn yn-Kyl and the Kcnnedy- McCai n-Flake-G uti crrczKolbe bills. The Corn yn-Kyl bill would expand border patrol capabi lities to add 10,000 new border patrol ;agents and 1,250 new customs and border protcction officers. State and local authorities would be authori7.ed to enforce federal immigration law under this proposal. The KennedyMcCain-Flake-Gutienn-Kolbe bill would require the Departmem o f Homeland

Security to develop a national strategy to iner~ aerial and ground surveillance.

Temporary and Long Term Guest Worker Plans One idea ptoposed by President Hush in his 2004 State of the Union address was a guest worker program. A guest worker program would offer temporary worker StatuS to u ndocu memed men and women now employed in the United States and to those in fore ign countries who have been offered em ployment here. The tWO aforemel1lioned immigrat ion bills include guest worker programs. The Ken nedy-McCa i n- FI ake¡G u t ierrez- Ko Ibe bill would requ ire undocumented workers already in the U.S. to register to work, pay a $1 ,000 fine for nOt registering prior and apply for legal permanent residency. G uest workers would be covered by employment laws. The Cornyn.Kyl bill would cre:llc a two- year guest worker visa called a ~W" visa, which is renewable up to two limes if the worker returns fo r one year in between

o ,0 is the largest

AS T f'..:

Squeezing the Immigration Balloon

renewals. The bill provides no pathway to legal residency, but it does allow immigrams who already li\'e in the U.S. to return to thei r countries of origin and regiSler for temporary worker status in the United States. The Corn yn-Kyl bill is generally seen as the toughest on illegal immigration. SOme of the questions surrounding the guest worker program are: who would be eligible for the program; whet her the program would provide any process 10 obtain legal permanent residency; how famil y members of el igible individuals would be treated; how the rules and requi rements would be enforced ; and what security- related measures would be enforced. There is also the issue of amnesty. Amnesty is typically defined as allowing illegal immigrams to permanently stay in the United States. Some feel that allowing illegal immigrants 10 sign up fo r a guest worker program , thereby allowing them to remain and work in the U.S. legally, is


oncology socIety In the

world, With more than 8,000 members who specialize in treating patients with radiation therapies. As a leading organization in radiation oncology.


biology and physics. the Society is dedicated to the

_._ .._ ..... _..------_._-_._ .. _----

" "0.'''' ::.::.-::C'.:.."':--:--=--==-

advancement of the practice of radiation oncology

__ -

... _----_ .. _.... ... --..... . .. _---_ _._--_. .----._----_._-----

by promoting excellence in patient care, providing opportunities for educational and profeSSional de¡ velopment, promoting research and disseminating research results and representing radiation oncology in a rapidly evolving socioeconomic healthcare environment. Visit us online at www.astro.orgor

through our d.dlcated patient Web site,



granting them amnesty. While the proposal of a guest worker plan should be considered, main concerns fo r my state and cou mry arc those of security and enforcement. Texas lawmakers have been keen to address these aspects, Senator HUlchison wams to expand current law enforcement programs so that officers. with proper training. can volunteer to patrol the border and aTrCSt illegal immigrants. I suppOrt a bill introduced by Congressman John Culberson that would create a border protection corps of ablebodied . eligible citizens for stales when its governors need more personnel than local. state or federal resources can provide. Most surveys show thai people arc 1I0t ready 10 support a guest worker program of any IYlle until we have credibility regarding prowcling our borders and enforcing our immigration laws. T he stronger law enforcement we have at our borders. the bener we will be able to lower the number of immigrants entcri ng into (he U.S. illegally.

Interior Enforcement In add ilion to securing Ihe border at portS of cnHy. comprehensive immigration reform must include interior enforcemell(. II mUSI also increase capaci ty at detelllion centers and increase security in targeled regions of the country Ihat employ immigrant workers. Border Pa trol agents released more than 34,000 illegal aliens into society during 2003 within hours of catching them because detention centers lacked enough bed space. This clearly poses a serious national security risk. Many also have entered this country legally on lourisl or Ollter visas. Their visas have expired, bUI they arc still working illegally in the United Stales. Many people are ready lO close our borders completely umil we can address the issue of illegals who are in our country today. With no capacity at ou r detemion centers, we arc finding illegal immigr.Ults here bUI simply telling them 10 show up for court at a future date for processing. That "future date~ seldom comes. Health Care Costs Federal law requires Ih:1I everyone, regardless of thei r status in th is coumry. their ability to payor whelher they have insuf'Jnce, should be able 10 receive emer· gency care. Beca use a disproportionate

number of illegal immigrants are uninsured, it places an enormous financial burden on local communities. StUdies have shown that in 2000 Ihe COSI of uncompensa ted care for illegals 10 Southwesl border communilies was $189.6 million. Another study estimated Ihal between 1999 and 2001. the Harris County Hospital DiSlrict in Houston spent $300 million on health care for unauthorized aliens, on ly $ 105 mill ion of wh ich was reimbursed by the federal goveTrlmCIlI.

Conclusion Even though there is disagreemctH aboul the be$[ sohuion for specific immigration problems, all panics agree 10 a few overarching goals that include Ihe following: I. Beller prolcction for our borders, making il difficull for terrorists to enter; 2. Closer monitoring of visilOrs elllering legally so we know who they arc and how 10llg thcy will Stay;

3. An awareness of the cost in heahhcare. ed ucation and social services for Ihose allowt:d 10 enter legally and the 12 million who are in this country illegally. America is a nation that values immigralion. The talenr and energy of people from all parts of the world who have emigrated to the U.S. have made this country what il is today. However, Ihe steady increase of illegal immigrants inlo the country is overwhelming many communities' .and law cnforcemenrs' capabilities. Now is lhe time fo r Congress and Ihe Adminislr:llion to address the issue of immigration. ~ -



Kay Gmng"

is i" ,," 511, Irrm reprnmring Ttxm' 1211J diJiricl. Sht" ur/Jn on 11)( HOU$t" Committu on Appropriations.

OUR PEOPLE. OUR NETWORK. Angie ~. Manager - Verilon F".05

In my four years al V8flZOfl. the real highlight has been helping build Ameflcas only large·scale. fully fiber-oplic network 10 deliver oor customers ultra·fast. powerful broadband. An innovation this big requjres Skill. so we're addlflg thousands of people /0 our exper//eam this year. And Verizon nelps us grow in oor jobs, with on·/he·job training. Instruclor·1ed and e·learning courses, and a IUIIIOt1 assislanc:e program. I/s no wonder FORTUNE- Magazlf)8 seIec/· ed VeflZOfl as "Ameflcas Most Admired TelecommunicallOflS Company · (March " 20(5). nils IS a specJ8I/ltne fot all of us. Future generalions 01 Venzon men and wanen WIll make the nelWOo'k faster and fTlOfe powerful. but only one gels 10 say: we broughl Americas only large-scale, fully fiber-optic network 10 lile. ThaIS somelhing I'm proud 10 be a part of.

--======~=============== 29

The Ripon Forum · November/December 2005

Opinions from Members of The Ripon Society's Congressional Advisory Board.

EKplaining the District of Columbia Fairness in Representation Act By U.S. Represemarive Tom Davis


he District of Columbia is many things many people - home to more than half a million people. capital of the free world, and internarion;l.1 symbol of democf:lCY. T he District's unique cOllSl'itutional statuS and historic evolution leave us with one of the most profound democratic paradoxes of our time: How do we reconcile the Framers' vision for the nation's capital with their aim 10 establish a republican form of go\'ernment in the new United States? As I srudied the problem, 1 focused on [WO prime requirements for any plan Ihal I could su pport. First, it nct:ded to Ix: permissible under the Const irution. Second. it nct:ded 10 be achievable in the current political environment. My icgis1arion, the District olCo/limbin to

Fnimm 1/1 JUpmmtntio1l Act (D.C FA IR Act). m l't:{S both these goals. The Plan The D.C FAJRAct is really \'ery simple. Treat the: District as a congressional district for the purposes of allowing the: pt.:ople of the District to elect a full, voting member to tite House of Represcmativcs. S('COndly. temporarily incTC:1SC the size of the House of Representatives by tWO, 10 437. until reapportionment for the 2012 cit.'Ction . The [Wo-seat expansion would not only make room for the District's sett, but it would also give an additional congressional re:presemarive 10 the state of Utah. In the apporrionment following the 2000 Census, Utah missed picking up a fourth House seat by a mere 85 people. Since Utah is an overwhelm ingly Republican state, it can be assumed th,u a Republican would be elected 10 the new scat. Likewise, as the District is overwhelmingly Democr:u. it is expected that it would dect a Democrat 10 Congress. -111e net increase 10 the House of Represematives wou ld be one Republican and one: Democrat, maintaining the currem political b.llance - which is viral to the success of any proposal to grant D.C. a \'oting member of Congress, After the 201 0 Census and the ensuing


re:lpportionment. Congress ....,ould return lO 435 members. The Dimict would keep its seat, and the other 434 nares would be divided. by populat ion, among the 50 states.

The Constitution The Constitutional basis fo r this legislation is found in Artide I, Section 8 under language commonly referred to as , he " District Clause." The District Clause confers CJ(tremely broad authority over the District on Congress: Congress's authority is "CJ(clusive" and covers "all Cases whatsOeVerin the Disuin. In support of this legislation. the Government Reform CommirH.'C sought a legal opinion from Georgetown University Law Professor Viet Dinh, who concludt.-d that Congress's broad legislative authority extends to the granting of Congressional vO{ing rights for District r~idents. Dinh's opinIOn refers to the text of the Constitution. judicial decisions, and similar Congressional act ions to support this proposal. The construct ion of the Constitution suggests the limited powers granted Congress in relation to the nates do not apply to the District. Professor Dinh states, "The D istrict C buse contains no such counterbalancing restraints because its authorization of 'exclusive Legislation in all Cases whatsoever' explicitl y recognizes that there is no compet ing state sovereign authority.~ This fact leads Professor Dinh to conclude, "In few, if any. other areas does the Constitution grant any broader authority to Congress [Q legislate. Professor Dinh po ints Out that there is no req ui rement th31 being a resident of a JIIlU is a requi rement for voting. For example, citizens of the lands ceded by Virginia and Maryland to crt."3.tC the District continued to vote in congressional elections in their original states for about a dCClde, until the federal government accepted the District in 1800. Plus, the Uniformed and O\'erseas Citizens Absentcc Voting Act allows American citizens to vote by absentee ballot in "the last place in which the person was <lomiciled before leaving the United St~tes." M


The overseas voter need nOI be a cirizen of the stare where voting occurs. Indeed, the voter need not have an abode ill that state. pay taxes in that state, or even intend to return to that state.

Why Only a House Vote? The long histOry of D.C. voting rights has been a hislOry of incremental change. Gelling a full vote in the House of Representatives is achievable righl now. The Senate is more problematic. for reaso ns both political (there is no politically neutral strategy available at this time) and legal (the Senate was conceived to protect the righls of $Iales, unl ike the "People's House~). Recall that it took a Constitutional Amendment to make SenalOrs elccted directly by the voters. T he D.C. FAIR Act neither mandates the future pass; of any particular legislation affccting the Senate, nor pTC'C ludes such a proposal. Similarly, the D.C. FAIR Act would nOl force Congress to pass similar legislation for its territories and possessions, such as Puerto Rico, G ualll, and American Samoa,

The Politics While the D.C. FAI R Act is designt.-d to be politically neutral, thai doesn't mean that supporting it doesn't ha\'e political payoffs for Republicans. Polls show that once people understand that the District actually has no Federal represemation at all they generally support giving District residents sollie SOrt of representation. This issue also gives credence to Republican efforts [0 reach out to minority communities. Democrats continue to point to the lack of representation in Was hingtOn as evidence of an unj ust society while they ha\'e done nothing to fix the problem. Republicans have an opportunity to actually fix the problem, The opportunity to do something good at little political COSt may not exist again for decades, if ever. QI -

Rl'pml'fltatiw Tom Davis is (I Virgin;', Rl'Plfblifllll and Chairman oftlJ(' HOI/$(' Commitur on Govn-"",rf/t Riform.

The Ripon Forum ' NovemberfOcrcmber 2005

Resources when and where you need them most.

Secur ity is dependent on the performan ce of each secu rity officer. T hat is w hy Securitas USA invests heavily in the recrui tment, screening and selection of its more than 120,000 security personnel throughout the United States. In additional to mandatory pre-assignm ent and site specifi c

training, Sccuritas USA works with each indi vidual to identi fy professional and personal growth obj ectives inpacling job sa ti sfac ti on, retention and performance, add ing value and reducing costs for security at

Protecting the Future of,-Imerica since 1850

l-800-23 2-7465