PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Subcommittee on International Trade. Hearings held.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in Senate · Mar 10, 1995
TABLE OF CONTENTS: Title I: Relationship of NAFTA Implementation to the Operation of the Caribbean Basin Initiative Title II: Related Provisions Caribbean Basin Trade Security Act - Title I: Relationship of NAFTA Implementation to the Operation of the Caribbean Basin Initiative - Amends the Caribbean Basin Economic Recovery Act (the Act) to accord certain textile and apparel articles and certain other articles (including canned tuna and petroleum) from Caribbean beneficiary countries, for a specified transition period, the same tariff and quota treatment (lower tariffs or duty-free treatment) accorded any such articles imported from Mexico under the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA). (Sec. 102) Directs the President to: (1) monitor the effects, if any, that implementation of NAFTA has on the access of beneficiary countries to U.S. markets for sugars, syrups, and molasses; and (2) take or propose any actions necessary to ameliorate any adverse effects such implementation may have on them. (Sec. 103) Grants duty-free treatment of Canadian liqueurs and spirituous beverages made from Caribbean rum. Title II: Related Provisions - Requires the President to meet with trade ministers of beneficiary countries in order to negotiate for their accession to the NAFTA, or to enter into free trade agreements with the United States that contain comparable provisions with those in the NAFTA and that would make progress in achieving certain trade negotiating objectives under the NAFTA. (Sec. 202) Directs the United States Trade Representative (USTR) to make an assessment of the economic development efforts and market oriented reforms in each beneficiary country, including each country's ability to undertake the obligations of the NAFTA. Requires the USTR, if such countries accede to the NAFTA or the United States negotiates a comparable free trade agreement with them, to provide to specified congressional committees a report on the economic impact of the new trade relationship on beneficiary countries.
People & committees
Sen. Graham, Bob [D-FL] · D–FL
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Subcommittee on International Trade. Hearings held.
Read twice and referred to the Committee on Finance.
Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR S3804)
Introduced in Senate
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
Source last updated: Aug 21, 2025. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.
AI Conversation Starters
Choose a perspective, copy a prompt, and paste it into your preferred AI. Each prompt includes the bill version and available official source links, and asks for counterarguments as well as supporting evidence.
Analyze S.529 as objectively as possible. Explain its main provisions, who would be affected, possible benefits and harms, implementation, exceptions, and uncertainties. Present the strongest arguments for and against it, and identify evidence needed to assess its public impact.
Examine S.529 through a progressive lens, focusing on fairness, access, economic inequality, and effects on vulnerable communities. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and distinguish stated goals from demonstrated outcomes.
Examine S.529 through a conservative lens, focusing on fiscal responsibility, institutional stability, federalism, and the scope of government. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and any provisions that challenge this perspective.
Examine S.529 through a civil-liberties and limited-government lens. Consider individual rights, privacy, voluntary choice, accountability, and government power. Explain tradeoffs, possible safeguards, and the strongest counterarguments without assuming the proposal is beneficial or harmful.