The Congressional Record is a unique source of public documentation. It started in 1873, documenting nearly all the major and minor policies being discussed and debated.
“INTRODUCTION OF THE DUTY PARITY ACT OF 2003” mentioning the U.S. Dept. of Commerce was published in the Extensions of Remarks section on pages E108 on Jan. 29, 2003.
The publication is reproduced in full below:
INTRODUCTION OF THE DUTY PARITY ACT OF 2003
______
HON. CHARLES W. ``CHIP'' PICKERING
of mississippi
in the house of representatives
Wednesday, January 29, 2003
Mr. PICKERING. Mr. Speaker, I rise before the House today to express my sincere concern for the severe economic conditions faced by the U.S. lumber industry. For nearly two decades our lumber industry has been at odds with the provincial governments of Canada over heavily subsidized softwood lumber. We've implemented numerous quick fixes to provide relief for our domestic industry, but since the expiration of the last U.S.-Canadian Softwood Lumber Agreement in 2001, lumber prices have continued to drop. If current market conditions continue, many lumber manufacturers will not survive the next 6 months.
I represent the Piney Woods of Mississippi. The timber industry is the second largest sector of our economy behind the poultry industry. My constituents depend on the production of lumber and timber harvest for jobs and economic stability. We are losing jobs and our economic base in the Third Congressional District of Mississippi because heavily subsidized softwood lumber imports are being dumped in the United States by the provincial governments of Canada.
Mr. Speaker, I realize the benefits of open markets, and my record clearly reflects that I am not against free trade. I am, however, opposed to unfair trade practices sometimes implemented by some of our trading partners. I oppose dumping, and I oppose the practice of the Canadian Government practically giving away trees to its mills for processing.
The Department of Commerce knows that the provincial governments of Canada are engaged in unfair trade practices. This is reflected by the countervailing duties and antidumping duties imposed on Canadian softwood lumber imports. Our hope was that these duties would level the playing field between our two countries. But that effort has failed because the Canadian provincial governments have simply expanded their subsidies to offset our duties.
In that light, Mr. Speaker, we are obliged to go a step further in our actions to promote fair trade. Today, I am introducing the Duty Parity Act of 2003. This legislation will clarify U.S. statute and ensure that our trade laws fully offset the values of unfairly traded products. My legislation will treat countervailing duties imposed by our government as costs of production when antidumping duties are calculated by the Department of Commerce. Not including these duties as costs of production will only permit continued unfair pricing by our trade partners at the expense of U.S. companies and workers. The Duty Parity Act will give the Commerce Department the authority to accurately account for all subsidies and impose properly valued duties. The EU and Canada treat countervailing duties as costs of production when determining antidumping duties. Why should we act differently?
I urge my colleagues to cosponsor this legislation to provide parity to our domestic lumber industry. We can ask our lumber mills to compete within the free market. But we can't ask them to compete against the treasuries of the Canadian provincial governments.
____________________
