WASHINGTON, DC – U.S. Senator Pat Roberts today questioned the U.S. Trade Representative Ambassador Susan Schwab regarding the Air Force’s tanker decision at a hearing of the Senate Finance Committee on the 2008 trade agenda.

The following are Senator Roberts’ prepared remarks:

"It truly makes me question our trade agenda when we’ve brought a massive case before the WTO challenging unfair subsidies or ‘launch aid’ provided by the EU governments to Airbus, then turning around and bestowing one of the largest military contracts to the same company using the very aircraft developed with unfair launch aid. The whole situation is like Alice in Wonderland or the Air Force in Wonderland. Not only does this defy common sense, but it raises some national security concerns as well.

"Now the Chairman mentioned copper and gold in Montana, the history of copper and gold, and the value of mining in his fine state. Now, with apologies to Larry Gatlin, all the trade gold in America is now in a bank in the middle of Paris, France, with somebody else’s name - and that name is Airbus.

"Ambassador Schwab, I think this ridiculous situation is a disservice to you and all of your efforts to protect the U.S. aerospace industry from unfair foreign competition. I don’t envy your position and hope that the misguided Tanker deal does not undermine you and our efforts.

"What is the status of the current case against Airbus? Are you still pursing it?

"Given the fact that we are aggressively pursing the WTO case, did DoD seek out your input, considering the $15 billion in launch aid alone - not to mention the great benefit of debt forgiveness?

"Did you hear back from the when you learned that the WTO case would not be part of the RFP?

"Was the USTR Office part of the decision making process?

"Perhaps this is a start to a new precedent where the United States starts handing out contracts to countries with whom we are challenging before the WTO. In fact, we just filed a case against China, which has a problem enforcing Intellectual Property Rights. Why don’t we just go ahead and give them a contract to provide the security for the patent office?

"On the flip side, does this make sense to award one of the largest military contracts in part to a company that has a separate retaliatory challenge before the WTO against the United States? The irony is almost laughable, if it weren’t true and so serious.

"Well, I hope that the Tanker decision doesn’t make this mountain you’re climbing any steeper. I’d like you to walk me through what happens next with our WTO case.

"The preliminary decision is due out in May, right. The next step is to determine compensation, correct? Then, if we find that Airbus and the EU countries are not complying with their commitments, then we could retaliate by increasing tariffs, right so far?

"Looking down the hypothetical road, a situation could arise that the United States must retaliate against Europe - potentially in the form of increased tariffs on foreign aircraft and aircraft parts. Let me get this straight, U.S. taxpayers could potentially foot the bill for higher duties imposed on spare parts for the Airbus tanker being "finished" in the United States? That’s quite a catch-22.

"The long and the short of it is, if this decision holds, it will be to the detriment of our local and national economy, if not our national security.

"Let me be clear, this is not an anti-trade rant. This is outrage with the fact that the Air Force chose the inferior aircraft in the so called competitive bidding process. Ambassador Schwab, I don’t expect you to have responses to most of my unanswered questions. That’s for the Air Force to face up to."

Senator Roberts is a member of the Senate Finance Committee and is an outspoken advocate for replacing the nation’s aging aerial refueling tanker fleet.

-30-