mr. speaker , quickly on process , we are not asking for an open rule ; we are asking for the ability to bring up a substitute and three specific amendments , number one . 
number two , as to the connection with cafta , the gentleman from pennsylvania ( mr. english ) xz4001230 was not in favor of cafta until there was an agreement to bring up his bill , and then he said he was for cafta . 
number three , what you are doing is limiting debate on this and also on cafta . 
we have major trade issues , and you do not want to discuss them . 
here is a reason why we need to have long debate on this issue and on cafta . 
we have been limited to 2 hours on cafta . 
will all the facts get out ? 
i am afraid not . 
for example , there was discussion in the media about commitments that were made by this administration regarding pocketings and linings , and that there had been an agreement reached with the cafta countries . 
we need a long time to debate so we can show that things are not true sometimes that are said to be true . 
i just saw an article from la nacion in costa rica about this alleged agreement on textiles , and here is a quote from the minister , the trade minister of costa rica . 
i am quoting : `` it is not true that those consultations , that negotiation , has occurred , and it is not at all true that we in costa rica and the rest of central america have sat down yet for that process of consultations. '' so we need a full airing of cafta and of the china bill . 
quickly , on the china bill , the gentleman from florida ( mr. shaw ) xz4003690 said that the rangel substitute calls for unilateral sanctions . 
that is not true . 
that is simply not true . 
there is a provision relating to currency allowing an action under 301 . 
if that action is taken , we go to the wto . 
so you get up here and say things that are just not correct . 
that is why we need more time . 
the currency thing , i heard another colleague on the republican side say we need more information . 
the treasury report comes out every 6 months . 
it is loaded with information , data just coming out of the ears of the treasury department . 
the trouble is , there is never any action . 
we have in our substitute provisions that say , let us have an avenue for action rather than simply more talk . 
so we should turn down this rule and , really , this bill . 
the gentleman from pennsylvania ( mr. english ) xz4001230 does not like the word `` fig leaf. '' it is a smoke screen ; maybe that is more polite . 
it is a smoke screen . 
it is an effort to say we are doing something when we are really not in order to give some people , i guess , an excuse to vote for another bill . 
that will not work . 
this is such a weak bill . 
we can do better . 
we should turn it down and have time to consider the substitute that was put together by the gentleman from new york ( mr. rangel ) xz4003330 and myself and others . 
