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.
“REGARDING STEEL IMPORTS” mentioning the U.S. Dept. of Commerce was published in the House of Representatives section on pages H10958-H10965 on Oct. 15, 1998.
The publication is reproduced in full below:
REGARDING STEEL IMPORTS
Mr. ENGLISH of Pennsylvania. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and agree to the resolution (H. Res. 598) calling on the President to take all necessary measures to respond to the surge of steel imports resulting from the financial crises in Asia, Russia, and other regions, and for other purposes.
The Clerk read as follows:
H. Res. 598
Whereas the current financial crises in Asia, Russia, and other regions have involved massive depreciation in the currencies of several key steel-producing and steel consuming countries, along with a collapse in the domestic demand for steel in these countries;
Whereas the crises have generated and will continue to generate surges in United States imports of steel, both from the countries whose currencies have depreciated in the crisis and from steel producing countries that are no longer able to export steel to the countries in economic crisis;
Whereas United States imports of finished steel mill products from Asian steel producing countries--the People's Republic of China, Japan, South Korea, India, Taiwan, Indonesia, Thailand, and Malaysia--have increased by 79 percent in the first 5 months of 1998 compared to the same period in 1997;
Whereas year-to-date imports of steel from Russia now exceed the record import levels of 1997, and steel imports from Russia and Ukraine now approach 2,500,000 net tons;
Whereas foreign government trade restrictions and private restraints of trade distort international trade and investment patterns and result in burdens on United States commerce, including absorption of a disproportionate share of diverted steel trade;
Whereas the European Union, for example, despite also being a major economy, in 1997 imported only one-tenth as much finished steel products from Asian steel producing countries as the United States did and has restricted imports of steel from the Commonwealth of Independent States, including Russia;
Whereas the United States is simultaneously facing a substantial increase in steel imports from countries within the Commonwealth of Independent States, including Russia, caused in part by the closure of Asian markets;
Whereas the United States, through the International Monetary Fund, generously participates in a bailout of the crisis countries on terms that do not deter and in fact encourage them to export their way out of the crisis; and
Whereas there is a well-recognized need for improvements in the enforcement of United States trade laws to provide an effective response to such situations: Now, therefore, be it
Resolved, That--
(1) in accordance with rule IX, clause 1, of the Rules of the House of Representatives, it is the sense of the House of Representatives that its integrity has been impugned by the failure of the executive branch to expeditiously enforce title VII of the Tariff Act of 1930 in response to the surge of steel imports resulting from the financial crises in Asia, Russia, and other regions; and
(2) the House of Representatives calls upon the President--
(A) to immediately review, for the 10-day period beginning on the date of the adoption of this resolution, the entry into the customs territory of the United States of all steel products that are the product or manufacture of Australia, China, South Africa, Ukraine, Indonesia, India, Japan, Russia, South Korea, or Brazil;
(B) if, after the 10-day period described in subparagraph
(A), the President finds that the Governments of Australia, China, South Africa, Ukraine, Indonesia, India, Japan, Russia, South Korea, or Brazil are not abiding by the spirit and letter of international trade agreements with respect to imports of steel products into the United States, to immediately impose a 1-year ban on the imports of all steel products that are the product or manufacture of Australia, China, South Africa, Ukraine, Indonesia, India, Japan, Russia, South Korea, or Brazil;
(C) to establish a task force within the executive branch to closely monitor imports of steel products into the United States from other countries to determine whether or not international trade agreements are being violated; and
(D) not later than January 5, 1999, to report to Congress on any other actions the President has taken, or intends to take, to ensure that all trading partners of the United States abide by the spirit and letter of international trade agreements with respect to imports of steel products into the United States.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. English) and the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Crane) each will control 20 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. English).
Mr. ENGLISH of Pennsylvania. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that I be allowed to yield 10 minutes to the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Traficant) and ask that he be allowed to further yield that time.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from Pennsylvania?
There was no objection.
General Leave
Mr. ENGLISH of Pennsylvania. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material on the resolution, House Resolution 598, now under consideration.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from Pennsylvania?
There was no objection.
Mr. ENGLISH of Pennsylvania. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself 1\1/2\ minutes.
Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of House Resolution 598. This resolution calls on the administration to act. That is exactly what this issue really boils down to. We in Congress can look at this issue all we want, but without the administration enforcing the laws that we pass, it will be for naught.
This resolution is in response to the crisis facing the U.S. steel industry. But it is not just steel. It is not just the 100,000 jobs that are directly related to the steel industry that may be affected by this growing crisis. It is also about the many other industries that may similarly face import challenges that will arise from the financial crises around the world. This issue is not about protectionism. On a level playing field, American steel producers can compete with anyone in the world. The real issue is whether we are prepared to regard with indifference the wholesale dumping of subsidized and devalued foreign steel products into our domestic market and whether our basic industries are allowed to compete in a marketplace with rules, or a Hobbesian state of nature.
I urge my colleagues to vote for this resolution as a means to send a powerful message to our trading partners that Congress will not tolerate predatory trading practices and a strong message to the Clinton administration that the time has come for concrete action to protect American jobs.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. CRANE. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. I rise in opposition to H. Res. 598 which calls upon the President to impose an import ban on steel products from 11 steel producing countries. While I support using our trade laws to address the question of whether steel is being traded unfairly resulting in injury to the U.S. industry and its workers, I oppose H. Res. 598 because it would circumvent this established process in violation of our obligations in the World Trade Organization.
The normal procedure provided under law for U.S. industries to seek relief from dumped imports begins with the domestic industry filing an antidumping petition with the Commerce Department. The law in this area has been developed in compliance with U.S. obligations in the Antidumping Code under the WTO.
H. Res. 598 not only violates the procedures established under U.S. law for making dumping determinations, it calls for action, specifically an outright import ban, that is well beyond the remedy prescribed in this situation. The action proposed by H. Res. 598 would make us vulnerable to challenge in the WTO and possible retaliation by our trading partners against U.S. exports in their own markets, a completely counterproductive result. Moreover, noncompliance with our own antidumping procedures makes it more difficult for us to convince our trading partners not to erect arbitrary barriers to U.S. exports that they consider undesirable. As Ben Franklin rightly pointed out, ``A good example is the best sermon.''
Recently I understand that the U.S. steel industry filed a number of antidumping petitions with the Commerce Department in compliance with U.S. law. I would encourage them to continue to pursue relief consistent with U.S. law. Passage of H. Res. 598, however, undermines U.S. interests and objectives in the WTO and puts at risk U.S. exports in other sectors.
I urge my colleagues to oppose H. Res. 598.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. TRAFICANT. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Bonior) the distinguished minority whip.
Mr. BONIOR. I thank my colleague for yielding time. Mr. Speaker, all across the United States, from the mighty foundries of the Monongahela Valley to the mills in Gary, Indiana, the men and women who make the steel that makes America strong are in danger of losing their jobs. They are in danger of losing their jobs because foreign steel is being dumped into the United States, dumped below cost. It is the same old story. We have heard this before. While a lot of these countries set quotas to limit the import of U.S. steel, we have an open market. Of course the result is America has become a dumping ground.
Have we not seen this happen before? I have seen it happen in autos, I have seen it happen in agriculture products. In steel, Russia, Korea, Japan, Indonesia, these and other countries are flooding the United States with cheap steel.
{time} 1515
Just over the past year imports from Russia rose 45 percent, from Korea they jumped 9 percent. Japan, they doubled. Imports from Indonesia tripled. Their economies are in such shambles and they are so desperate for dollars that they are willing to sell their steel for less than it cost them to produce.
Mr. Speaker, it is wrong, it is illegal, and we will not allow it to continue.
The United States should do what it can to help these countries return to prosperity; it is in our interests. But this does not mean, it does not mean sacrificing American jobs to do so, and we are talking about 100,000 plus jobs here.
There are steel workers in my State of Michigan right now that are doing well, but they see what is happening, and they see the oncoming typhoon and the oncoming storm out in the Pacific. They want to keep their jobs. Layoffs have begun.
Enough is enough. We have got to take strong action to guarantee a fair market and save our steel industry. Tens of thousands of jobs are at risk. We need action today, not a year from now, not a few months, but today.
Stop the illegal dumping and support the resolution of my colleague.
Mr. ENGLISH of Pennsylvania. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Regula), probably the most aggressive leader in this body on this issue and the chairman of the Congressional Steel Caucus.
Mr. REGULA. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding this time to me, and first I would like to commend the gentleman from Alabama
(Mr. Aderholt) for all of his work with the Congressional Steel Caucus to protect steel jobs in the United States. I understand that he will support H. Res. 598 today, and certainly I will, and I urge all my colleagues to do so.
This resolution calls on the President to take all necessary measures. What are these? The tools are there.
One, the most significant and far-reaching powers under the International Economic Emergency Powers Act. Under this act, the President may block imports to deal with any unusual and extraordinary threat to the national security, foreign policy or the economy of the United States if he declares a national emergency, and this is a threat to our economy.
Two, under the anti-dumping laws the President may impose anti-
dumping duties that equal the amount of dumping if injury to the United States industry is shown, and these duties may be imposed retroactively if the administration finds critical circumstances which they can do; and B, the President may accelerate the statutory deadlines for determining whether dumping exists so that duties may be imposed sooner.
Three, under the countervailing duty law the President may impose countervailing duties that equal the amount of any subsidy provided by the foreign government if injury to the U.S. industry is shown, and this injury is not only to the U.S. industries' star people, people that will not have a paycheck between now and Christmas, people that will be suffering because of layoffs due to the dumping.
Four, under section 201 the President may take action including imposing duties, a tariff rate quota or quantitative restrictions to respond to a surge of imports that is exactly what this bill calls for that is substantially causing serious injury to the United States industry.
Lastly, under section 301 the President must take unilateral action, action on his part alone if he determines that a country is taking action in violation of trade agreements.
The President has the tools. Mr. President, use them.
Mr. CRANE. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from New York (Mr. Houghton).
(Mr. HOUGHTON asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)
Mr. HOUGHTON. Mr. Speaker, I have been sort of a hard hat all my life about countries and industries taking advantage of the United States. One of the hardest things for me to have seen in terms of our basic materials are consumer electronics, things like that, where as countries come in and put our businesses out of business and yet at the same time we cannot get back into their countries.
Now having said that, we must be careful in how we counterattack. The idea of banning steel I think is very, very risky. We have provisions in the trade law called 301 and super 301 as against dumping which we can enact. They are on the books; we can do something about it.
Furthermore, even with the depreciation of the currency where there is no dumping at all there are opportunities to use section 201 which allows endangered industries to appeal and get some sort of relief.
Those 2 provisions are on our books. We must use them, use those provisions. That is what the trade law was supposed to do.
Mr. TRAFICANT. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Indiana (Mr. Visclosky), who along with the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Regula), the gentleman from Minnesota (Mr. Oberstar) and the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. English), is largely responsible for these measures.
Mr. VISCLOSKY. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Traficant) for yielding this time to me, and I think thank you's are also in order for the leadership for finally bringing this important issue to a vote on a real steel resolution for the House of Representatives, and I do want to add my compliments as well to the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Regula) for his leadership on this issue.
The gentleman from Illinois in his remarks indicated that we might be vulnerable, if we pass this resolution today, to retaliation. I will sharply disagree. We have been attacked already. Imports are up from Japan in the first 7 months of this year 114 percent. We have been attacked by Indonesia whose exports to the United States of steel products are up over 300 percent. We have been attacked by South Korea whose steel exports to the United States are up 89 percent.
Now, as I mentioned earlier on the floor today, there is a letter being circulated by the so-called American Institute for International Steel. Because the steel companies on behalf of themselves and behalf of those workers whose jobs are threatened have finally filed trade cases to protect themselves in their very existence, the International Steel Institute has sent out a letter dated September 30 saying the earliest date for the withholding of liquidations would be December 9. Under the law, any imports that arrive during this period, i.e., September 30 to December 9, cannot be touched by any dumping duty that may be found.
Thank you, International Steel Institute. The translation is, dump now, dump often, dump a lot but do it by December 9.
I am not worried about retaliation, Mr. Speaker. I am worried about the attack we are under.
The administration has not acted and that is why we are here today in this House under the bipartisan resolution of the gentleman from Ohio
(Mr. Traficant) to call upon the administration to act.
I would further disagree with the assertions of the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Crane). This does not demand a ban. It allows a ban, and I ask my colleagues to support the Traficant bipartisan resolution.
Mr. ENGLISH of Pennsylvania. Mr. Speaker, how much time is remaining?
The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Pease). The gentleman from Pennsylvania
(Mr. English) has 6\1/2\ minutes remaining. The gentleman from Illinois
(Mr. Crane) has 16\1/2\ minutes remaining. The gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Traficant) has 6 minutes remaining.
Mr. CRANE. Mr. Speaker, I yield as much time as he may consume to the gentleman from California (Mr. Dreier), our distinguished colleague from the Committee on Rules.
Mr. DREIER. Mr. Speaker, I thank the distinguished chairman of the Subcommittee on Trade for yielding.
Mr. Speaker, this resolution is very troubling. It demands that the President impose a 1-year ban on foreign steel imports which is completely counter to our anti-dumping laws and the rules-based trading system that we have in both the general agreement on tariffs and trades and the World Trade Organization.
Mr. Speaker, the bill is an outrageous Smoot-Hawley-style response to the economic difficulties brought about by the Asian financial crisis. Support for this caveman economic policy would show the world that the United States Congress is prepared to repeat the mistakes of the great depression.
There is no question that American steel producers are facing a stiff test from foreign steel that is priced at devalued currencies. However, steel is not the only American industry challenged by the economic downturn in Asia and Russia and which threatens to spread to Latin America. In California, millions of working families depend on producing computers, electronic components, industrial machinery, communications equipment, aircraft, semiconductors, textiles, apparel, autos, glassware, engineering and management services and a whole range of agriculture interests, and all are facing tough times because of the very, very sad problems that we are facing with the international economy.
Why are we taking one industry, steel, and offering it the most outrageous protectionist, special interest assistance while so many of those industries that I mentioned and so many workers go without help?
Of course, my colleagues Congressmen Smoot and Hawley might simply propose that we build the same steel wall of protectionism around all of those industries as well. The line forms right out on the Capitol steps just behind the steel guys.
The right response to the very real international economic challenges facing this country is to focus on broad, national solutions, rather than attempting to protect one single industry.
Mr. Speaker, this resolution is bad trade policy. It offers nothing more than a rapid descent into a collapse of the international trading regime and a repeat of the 1930s. It is an insult to the millions of hard working Americans feeling the pressure of the global economy who do not work in steel mills.
I urge opposition to this resolution.
Mr. REGULA. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield?
Mr. DREIER. I yield to the gentleman from Ohio.
Mr. REGULA. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding.
Mr. Speaker, it says in the resolution that the countries are not abiding by the letter of international trade agreements. In the gentleman's opinion, should we allow these countries to violate, that is an operative word, violate, international trade agreements?
Mr. DREIER. Reclaiming my time, no, I do not believe they should. Based on what I have seen, this resolution is a violation of, as I said, not only our anti-dumping laws but the rules-based trading system that has been put into place by the WTO and the general agreement on tariffs and trade.
Mr. REGULA. Do not we have a problem with these countries who are violating trade agreements and dumping into our markets? Should they not be enforced? Should they not be required to meet the law?
Mr. DREIER. I strongly support enforcement of those agreements and I believe it should be done by way of the WTO, which is an organization which an overwhelming majority of the United States Congress got us involved in.
My view is that this resolution is counter to the structure that has been put into place to address this, and if the gentleman looks at those industries, as I said, in my State of California and in other parts of the country, that are being devastated because of the crisis that exists in the Pacific Rim and now in Latin America, it seems to me that moving in one single area is a real mistake for us and could have a devastating impact.
Mr. REGULA. Mr. Speaker, if the gentleman will continue to yield, maybe we should broaden this to take in some of the other illegal and dumped imports into our markets.
Mr. DREIER. Reclaiming my time, I would say once again that there are a litany of industries and there may be some people who believe that we should take on every single industry, go ahead and pull up the drawbridge, and while 96 percent of the world's consumers are outside of our borders and we are trying our darnedest to take advantage of that, we clearly would get into a major international trade war. That is why I believe that this is very bad policy.
I would be happy to further yield to the gentleman, if he would like.
Mr. REGULA. I think the only thing, I think the gentleman would agree that if we are going to have trade agreements and they are going to mean anything, they should be respected by our trading partners and they should not be allowed to violate them?
Mr. DREIER. I totally agree in strong enforcement of those but I believe that this kind of action is, in fact, counterproductive.
Mr. REGULA. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman.
Mr. TRAFICANT. Mr. Speaker, what is the breakdown of the time?
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. English) has 6\1/2\ minutes remaining. The gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Crane) has 11\1/2\ minutes remaining. The gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Traficant) has 6 minutes remaining.
Mr. ENGLISH of Pennsylvania. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Weller), a member of the Committee on Ways and Means.
(Mr. WELLER asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)
Mr. WELLER. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of this bipartisan effort to help save steel jobs in Illinois and throughout this country.
The question is simple. When we are losing jobs, steel jobs, good paying jobs in Illinois, why has there been no action by the Clinton administration? Why does the Clinton administration do nothing while Illinois steel workers lose jobs? We have 6,000 steel workers in Illinois and, frankly, this resolution is a call to arms. It is a call for action.
{time} 1530
There are over 20 firms producing steel or steel product in the district I have the privilege of representing. It is an issue of jobs for the folks back home.
Here is what it means. Birmingham Steel shut down for a week, is now only working four days a week. Belson Steel has cut their payroll by 10 percent. Acme Steel in Chicago has filed bankruptcy. Northwestern Steel and Wire Company has said it may cut up to 450 jobs at Illinois mills.
It is time for action, Mr. Speaker. Japanese steel imports have almost doubled, Korean steel imports are up 89 percent, imports in general are up 45 percent. To quote Marc Pozan of Belson Scrap and Steel, ``it is not a flood, it is a deluge.'' We need to put a stop to it. It is time for action.
Mr. Speaker, I include the following article for the Record.
[From the Kankakee Daily Journal, Oct. 11, 1998]
Steel Imports Hit Area Hard
(By Roy Bernard)
A tidal wave of foreign steel and scrap is swamping the U.S. market, and its impact is being felt by two Bourbonnais businesses.
Birmingham Steel was forced to close one week at the beginning of September, idling 285 workers, said plant manager John Ohm.
He added that since then, employees have returned to work in the mini-mill, but their schedules have been reduced to 32-hour work weeks. Birmingham Steel's workforce in Joliet also had a one-week stoppage, and now people there are working four days a week instead of five.
The company is trying to avoid permanent cutbacks.
``There is a flood of foreign steel into this country,'' Ohm said. ``We've had to cut back both operations, but we're not planning any layoffs.''
Meanwhile, at nearby Belson Scrap and Steel, the company is facing a double whammy. Cheaper foreign scrap is being shipped to the United States and Belson can't compete on price.
At the same time, the Belson Steel Center is losing business from companies that are buying cheaper foreign steel.
``Warehouses and manufacturers normally buy their steel from the domestic markets,'' said Marc Pozan, president of Belson Scrap & Steel.
The two-way attack has resulted in a 10 percent reduction in the number of Belson's employees, or about 15 workers, he said.
Foreign scrap and steel is ``affecting every part of our business,'' Pozan said.
``This glut of foreign steel is causing an oversupply of steel for the consuming industry,'' he added. ``They're cutting back production and using less scrap. There is an oversupply of scrap.''
Because of the dumping of foreign steel, the Belson Steel Center has had to lower its price for its product and that caused a decrease in the company's profits and forced the Belson's to reduce its overhead by laying off workers, said Pozan.
The steel is coming from Asia and lately Russia. Many of the Asian and Russian companies are desperate to keep their employees working, so they are selling the steel for even less than what it costs to produce, Pozan said.
He is calling for the federal government to step in and issue tariffs on foreign steel.
``I strongly urge that something needs to be done to deal with these foreign practices,'' Pozan said. ``Countries are giving these companies subsidies to sell steel cheaper in our market.
``We need to put tariffs on this foreign steel, to stop this flood of imported steel. It's not a flood, it's a tidal wave,'' Pozan added.
For people who make a little extra income collecting steel and aluminum cans, they will find the price soon will be dropping. Belson's is paying 32 cents a pound for aluminum. About three years ago, the price was 45 cents a pound.
Pozen said he began noticing signs of the foreign flood about three months ago. Most ports are seeing 50 percent increases in steel imports this year.
Ohm said Birmingham Steel saw the first signs of steel dumping in the South in May and June. Since then, the foreign steel has made its way up the Mississippi River and into the Chicago area.
Birmingham Steel in Bourbonnais Township continues to buy domestic scrap because it is too expensive to ship the scrap upriver to Chicago.
The company's plants in the South have been buying foreign scrap. While that might appear to make the Southern mills more efficient, Ohm noted that the Bourbonnais Township facility underwent extensive modernization, and that makes the cost of reinforcing bar production here to be competitive with the Southern plants.
``That modernization has certainly helped us,'' said Ohm.
One of the possible bright spots for Belson and Birmingham Steel is the announcement that the Chapel Steel Co. and the Alabama Metal Industries Corp. are moving to the former CBI building, which is near Belson's and Birmingham Steel. Both new companies are from Birmingham, Ala.
``This is great news for the area,'' said Pozan.
``Hopefully, they will buy some scrap and some steel. We hope the companies will be great trading partners.''
Ohm said Alabama Metal Industries operated a facility in Chicago and is moving to CBI. Alabama Metal ``has been a customer, so I don't see any benefit except that the company will be closer to us.''
Chapel Steel would be a new customer that could bring more business to Birmingham Steel, Ohm said.
Mr. TRAFICANT. Mr. Speaker, I yield one minute to the gentleman from Minnesota (Mr. Oberstar), our distinguished ranking member of the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure and a fighter for years for the steel industry and for fairness.
(Mr. OBERSTAR asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)
Mr. OBERSTAR. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding me time.
Mr. Speaker, I am for free trade, fairly conducted. Steel? Why steel? Because it is the most versatile building material of an industrial society. It is vital to a nation's progress, both here and abroad.
Twenty years ago when steel was under assault, we were told then by the free-traders, the unlimited, no-holds-barred free-traders, you are old, outmoded and inefficient; you ought to modernize. That is why foreign steel is coming into this country.
Today, 350,000 jobs fewer, $50 billion more invested in the steel industry and an efficient industry that produces the best steel in the world, we are now told, oh, you are trying to draw a moat around the industry.
All we are trying to do is tell the Federal Government, enforce the laws that set forth the conditions for free and fair trade. The previous speaker said, why has the Clinton Administration done nothing?
Well, we asked the same question in 1981 of the Reagan Administration; because there are free-traders in both administrations that say no-holds-barred, play by the Marquis of Queensberry rules, while our adversaries are using black-belt karate.
It is time to stand up for steel.
Mr. Speaker, I yield two minutes to the gentleman from New York (Mr. Gilman), the chairman of the Committee on International Relations.
(Mr. GILMAN asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)
Mr. GILMAN. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding me time.
Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to rise in strong support of the bipartisan resolution offered by the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Traficant). We have a growing concern that steel imports are flooding into our Nation without any effective response from the administration. Scores of our Nation's highly efficient steel producers are at risk, as are the jobs of thousands of steel workers across the country.
While I know that several of my colleagues on this side of the aisle have some concerns and reservations about the imposition of an immediate ban on steel imports into this country, surely our trade negotiators can now begin the long overdue effort to put voluntary constraints in place on below-market-priced steel from foreign nations that are dumping steel and steel products into our Nation.
This resolution asks for a report and monitoring by the administration on the extent to which our international trade agreements are being violated. I think it is long past due for the administration to demand, as this resolution does, that our trade partners abide by the spirit and letter of our trade agreements.
Despite the fact that American firms are now the lowest cost, most flexible producers among the industrialized nations, our overall merchandise trade deficit in 1997 reached $198 billion. At current rates this deficit is expected to reach some $282 billion by the end of the year. Our deficit with Japan is expected to reach $72 billion in this year alone.
Accordingly, Mr. Speaker, in the interests of protecting our steel industry, I urge adoption of this measure.
Mr. ENGLISH of Pennsylvania. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Ney), a strong friend of steel.
Mr. NEY. Mr. Speaker, I want to commend the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Traficant) and the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Regula) for their hard work on an extremely important issue.
Somebody mentioned today about special interests. We are talking about special interests today: American men and women, working Americans. That is a good special interest. There is nothing wrong with working people and for this Congress to stand up for them.
It is time for the Congress to wake up. It is time for the White House to wake up. I talked to day to the mayor of Weirton, West Virginia. He is having a rally tonight in Weirton.
They have to rally and try to beg their government to do something to help them? The mayors in Europe did not have to beg European governments to help them. What is going on? What is wrong with our thinking?
The United States wheel workers of America, the gentleman from Ohio
(Mr. Traficant), the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Regula), many others, the companies, are in this fight for their survival; not for the holy dollar. For the survival of workers, their communities, their families, their ability to pay for their schools, their ability to pay their taxes, their ability to keep their communities going and to survive. That is what this argument is about.
It is a very clear choice. Now is the time to stand up for a change for our workers. Now is the time to stand up for a change for our jobs. Now is the time to stand up for America. Vote yes.
Here is your vote. It is very clear cut. Are you going to vote for Weirton, West Virginia, New Philadelphia, Ohio, and Zanesville, Ohio, or Russia? Are you going to vote for Steubenville, Ohio, Toronto, Ohio, Youngstown, Ohio, Bellaire, Ohio, or Japan? That is the clear-cut choice.
A yes vote stands up for a change for working Americans. This is good for the country, this is good for our workers. I urge support of this measure.
Mr. TRAFICANT. I to yield 30 seconds to the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Doyle), a great young member from the Pittsburgh area.
(Mr. DOYLE asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)
Mr. DOYLE. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to urge support of the Traficant resolution. The U.S. steel industry and its workers are suffering tremendously from reduced orders as a result of dumping by Asian and Russian producers, but the administration has not acted to stop this illegal practice.
The members of the European Union have been smart enough to protect their steel industry from dumping by erecting temporary barriers to steel imports during the financial crisis. Their steel industry will weather this storm.
American steel workers, the most efficient in the world, cannot continue to be besieged by foreign steel products, while waiting indefinitely for trade cases to be settled. Damage to the American steel industry is extensive, severe and rapidly growing. The House must act today.
Mr. ENGLISH of Pennsylvania. Mr. Speaker, it is a privilege for me to yield one minute to the gentleman from Indiana (Mr. Buyer), a friend of steel.
Mr. BUYER. Mr. Speaker, I am here to also speak on behalf of steel workers across the country, and particularly those in Indiana, who are in the midst of an unprecedented flood of foreign steel.
The steel industry is an industry fueled on the backs of hard-working Americans. I toured the Bethlehem steel net and spoke with many of the steel workers. They are the best in the world, but they can compete only if it is fair competition.
A decade ago the steel makers were forced, again feeling the surge of imports being dumped on our markets at below cost, and we acted, but it was only a short-term fix.
I suppose what bothers me most is when I look across the country at many different industries, steel is an industry that is most vital to our Nation's security. It is a national security issue, and that is what has me most concerned.
I am a supporter of GATT, I am a supporter of NAFTA, and I voted against Fast Track. You say why would you vote against Fast Track? Because it bothers me that the administration has negotiated so many trade agreements out there, and then they do not even enforce the trade agreement and even violated some of those trade agreements.
This is a prime example where the administration should be leaning forward, not with bended-knee to these nays nations that violate these trade agreements. So this is a strong message. Let us do the right thing and let us back the American worker.
Mr. TRAFICANT. Mr. Speaker, I yield 30 seconds to the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Evans), the distinguished ranking member on the Committee on Veterans' Affairs.
Mr. EVANS. Mr. Speaker, I rise on behalf of the hard working steel workers in my district and the 450 employees of Northwestern Steel and Wire who were informed last week that their jobs would be eliminated at the end of this year.
We have a responsibility to our steel industry and its employees to ensure a level playing field. This means aggressively enforcing our own trade laws and imposing a moratorium on steel imports from Asia, Russia and Brazil until our industry is back on its feet. This means demanding that the administration provide us with concrete evidence that they have responded to this steel crisis.
We can no longer stand idly by as more and more steel workers lose their jobs. I urge my colleagues to support the Traficant resolution.
Mr. TRAFICANT. Mr. Speaker, I yield 30 seconds to the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Kucinich), one of the youngest mayors ever elected in the big city of Cleveland, doing a fine job in Cleveland.
(Mr. KUCINICH asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)
Mr. KUCINICH. Mr. Speaker, I rise on behalf of Cleveland steel workers. Steel imports have reached a crisis level. Thousands of steel workers are in danger of losing their jobs. We have to take strong action, which is what this resolution does.
Opponents are more concerned with the integrity of the World Trade Organization than with the integrity of American anti-dumping laws and the jobs of American steel workers. I say we should stand up for steel and American steel workers. Support H. Con. Resolution 598.
Mr. TRAFICANT. Mr. Speaker, I yield 30 seconds to the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Pascrell), a distinguished member of the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure.
Mr. PASCRELL. Mr. Speaker, a one-year ban is a reasonable and just response to the countries that have defied international law and compromised the security of our own Nation.
As to the issue of the World Trade Organization, all I can say is that we do not represent the World Trade Organization. We represent the American people. They want action. They do not want consultation, they do not want negotiation, they do not want litigation. They want jobs. And that is what we are here to uphold, and that is what we should be standing for today. Everybody should be voting yes on this resolution.
Members of this body did not take an oath to uphold and protect GATT; we took an oath to uphold and protect the Constitution of the United States. Do it!
And the Constitution says that Congress shall have the power and authority to regulate commerce with foreign nations--not the WTO.
Finally, the President took an oath to uphold and enforce the laws of the United States--not the WTO. That's what we're asking the President to do: uphold the trade laws of the United States.
Mr. ENGLISH of Pennsylvania. Mr. Speaker, I yield one minute to the gentleman from California (Mr. Horn), a strong friend of steel.
Mr. HORN. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding me time.
Mr. Speaker, I happen to represent the two largest ports in the United States, the Port of Long Beach and the Port of Los Angeles. I want to see steel moving both ways through those great ports. They are among the top in the world. But, right now, 90 percent of the steel from those ports comes in from Asia. Only 10 percent goes out from the United States.
Now, if this were 1959 when we had the six month steel strike, that would be one thing. We were not competitive then. We are now competitive. We have quality steel, and we can match wits with anybody. But when you get into dumping, and we had a lot of that in the fifties, we have had it periodically, it means they are simply selling below market price, and that is what they are doing now in this recession that has cut its way across Asia.
We need to call them to the bar of justice. The fact is, the laws are on the books. The administration knows it. Now let us have the administration use the power and enforce the law. The only thing these countries understand is a tough trading mission, and if we are going to have fair trade, that is what we have to have.
{time} 1545
Mr. TRAFICANT. Mr. Speaker, I yield the balance of my time to the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. English) for the purpose of closing debate.
The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Bonilla). The gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. English) will be recognized for the remainder of the time of the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Traficant).
Mr. CRANE. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time.
Mr. Speaker, I again rise in strong opposition to House Resolution 598. I do this not because I dispute the seriousness of the issue at hand, but because I believe that the methods being used are significantly misguided, and will lead to a downward spiral of protectionism.
The proponents of this resolution argue that the Asian financial crisis has led countries to dump their products on the U.S. market at below fair market prices. In response, the proponents of House Resolution 598 call upon the President to impose a 1-year ban on imports of steel products from the countries listed in the resolution, many of whom are suffering from severe financial and economic difficulties.
I believe that this response would send a very bad signal to the governments of the targeted countries, at a time when the United States is encouraging them to adopt market-opening policies which will bring long-term stability to their economies. Moreover, terminating U.S. purchases of steel from these countries through an import ban would likely worsen the economic crisis faced by these countries and create more turmoil in the region.
I believe it is in our interest to maintain a more constructive approach to this problem by working with our friends and allies in this critical region of the world. On this basis, the gentleman from Texas
(Chairman Archer) introduced a resolution, House Concurrent Resolution 350, which was brought to the House floor for a vote on October 12.
This resolution called upon the President to pursue vigorous enforcement of U.S. trade laws with respect to steel; to negotiate with Japan, Korea, and the European Union to eliminate barriers and open their markets to the glut of steel on the market; to closely monitor import levels; and to report to Congress by January 5 on the impact the significant increase in steel imports is having on employment, prices, and investment in the United States.
Passage of House Concurrent Resolution 350 would have sent a strong, clear, and united message to the President and to the world that Congress is deeply concerned about this issue. Unfortunately, many of the proponents of the resolution before us today chose to politicize this matter by voting against House Concurrent Resolution 350, and they defeated the resolution.
Mr. Speaker, I have no disagreement with the proponents of House Resolution 598 about the seriousness of the impact that the increase in steel imports is having on the U.S. industry and on its workers. However, I believe that their approach is not only the wrong solution, but that it may lead to more severe problems in Asia that could have far more serious repercussions for the world.
I urge my colleagues to oppose House Resolution 598.
Mr. ENGLISH of Pennsylvania. Mr. Speaker, it is my privilege to yield all my remaining time to the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Traficant), the prime sponsor of this legislation, to close debate.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Traficant) is recognized for 3\1/2\ minutes.
Mr. TRAFICANT. Mr. Speaker, I thank my neighbor, who has done an outstanding job in western Pennsylvania, which has been devastated for yielding.
I want to rise to thank the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Ralph Regula). If it were not for him working out the machinations of whatever instrument might pass, we would not be here; the gentleman from Ohio
(Mr. Bob Ney) representing steelworkers; the gentleman from California
(Mr. Steve Horn) for looking at fairness; the gentleman from Indiana
(Mr. Pete Visclosky).
Let me just say, Mr. Speaker, in October of 1977 the first major steel mill in America closed, and it was in my district. Since then, thousands and thousands and thousands of workers not only have lost their jobs, their homes, their pensions, their health care, they lost everything. But do Members know what? They never lost hope, hope that the Congress of the United States would some day look at illegal trade.
This is not a debate about free trade. Many free traders understand the game, and who was more of a staunch free trader than Ronald Reagan? But in the early eighties, when Japan literally almost destroyed an American icon, Harley-Davidson, Ronald Reagan said, enough is enough. He imposed quotas. He imposed sanctions. He forced the Japanese to open up 20 percent of their semiconductor business market. Ronald Reagan did what he had to do that day. Many of us felt he could have even done more.
We know this president is not going to implement a ban, but we also know that this House is telling the President, by God, if you are going to worry about violating the WTO and GATT, what about their illegal trade? Is that not a violation of the WTO and GATT?
The President must act. The Congress today will tell the President, he has not acted. He must use whatever means necessary to stop illegal trade. That is a violation of law.
I want to say one last thing. I think Congress is coming together to look at a major phenomenon, Mr. Speaker. We are the marketplace. We cannot be a protectionist Nation, but we cannot allow our Nation's sovereignty and national security to be put at risk by illegal practices.
There is a mechanism for it. If this president has the anatomy to do what is necessary, they may take him to the WTO. By God, so be it. If we are going to have a WTO, let us have a ruling. We allow the President to take that stand.
I appreciate the support offered by the gentleman from New York (Mr. Gilman) more than the gentleman knows. I think it shows that many free traders want fairness. We will not tolerate illegal trade. I am asking for an aye vote on behalf of American workers, American business. I am asking for an aye vote on behalf of farmers, on behalf of vegetable growers, on behalf of our high-tech industries.
I want to thank the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. English) and the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Regula) for the great job they have done.
Mr. STUPAK. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to urge the Republican leadership to take up H. Res. 598, a resolution demanding the Administration to stop the illegal dumping that is going on in our nation's steel markets.
While, the House Leadership delays and refuses to schedule a vote on this urgent issue, American jobs are being lost every day. In my district, jobs are being lost because American steel producers cannot compete with the illegally priced steel.
The resolution would call for an immediate review and investigation of this situation. It would call for a one year ban on steel from any country that refuses to enforce international trade law. It would establish a task force to ensure that this critical situation is closely monitored. Finally, the resolution asks for a report to Congress from the Administration for its plan for dealing with this crisis.
Mr. Speaker, while the Republicans play politics, Americans are losing their jobs. Stop playing politics and pass H. Res. 598.
Mr. COYNE. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of this important legislation, and in support of America's threatened steel workers.
Mr. Speaker, today foreign countries like Japan, Russia, and Brazil are dumping millions of tons of steel in this country below cost. Their economies are in trouble, and they are trying to export their way out of financial calamity.
I am concerned about America and American jobs. American steel workers should not bear the burden of solving the world's economic crisis.
My good friend, Mr. Traficant, has introduced the legislation which is before us today, and I for one am going to vote in support of it. This resolution calls upon the President to impose a one-year ban on steel imports from Japan, Russia, and Brazil. In addition, it calls for the administration to closely monitor steel imports from other countries to determine whether they, too, are dumping steel in the United States.
America's steel workers and their families are depending on us today to do the right thing. They need our help in combating this unfair competition from overseas. I urge my colleagues today to join me in standing in solidarity with America's steel workers and pass this important resolution.
Mr. SOUDER. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H. Res. 598. This is an issue we have struggled with for a while now and I am pleased to see increasing support here in the House. The US steel industry, a highly competitive world-class producer, is being inundated by unfairly traded imports. In one year, from June 1997 to June 1998, steel imports from Japan grew by 113.7%, from Korea, 89.5%, and from Russian, 50.6%.
This is not because they are producing better steel, and they certainly aren't more efficient. Since restructuring in the mid-80's the US steel industry is the world leader in quality, efficiency and productivity. On an even playing field, US steel producers are second to none.
Dumping of steel is occurring because many countries in economic crisis have adopted policies of exporting their way out of their mess. They will do this at any cost, including selling prices that don't remotely cover their costs of production.
Foreign steel is being sold in the US at far below market value. Import prices, traditionally $20-$30 per ton less than domestic prices, are now $80-$100 per ton less than domestic prices--according to David Higbee, President of Sawhill Tubular Division of Armco, Inc.
The combination of massive tonnages of steel arriving at US ports and the aggressively low prices at which they are being sold has caused intense price distortion through our industry, even during a period of strong domestic demand for steel products. In the face of deterioriating prices, US producers have been forced to cut production, slash expenditures, and lay off employees.
This is not trade based on comparative advantage. It's time we require those foreign countries that we assist to stop unfairly propping up their dying steel industries at the expense of our American companies.
I believe the onus should be put on foreign companies and governments to prove that they are not dumping steel below cost. They simply need to be held accountable for selling one penny below their manufacturing cost. A slap on the wrist with a countervailing duty just isn't enough.
We are not talking about protecting American industry here. Rather, it's about achieving equity. A foreign company selling steel under market value is a question of competitiveness. A foreign company selling steel under cost is a question of fairness.
I would also like to submit for the Record the remarks of Keith Busse, CEO of Steel Dynamics International, during a hearing of the steel caucus last month.
It is time to send a message to those countries that knowingly dump with intent to cause severe injury to our steel industry. We can no longer in good faith continue to help those that continuously injure us.
Statement of Keith Busse, President and CEO, Steel Dynamics, Inc.,
Member, Board of Directors, Steel Manufacturers Association
Mr. Chairman, and Members of the Steel Caucus, I appreciate the opportunity to appear before you today along with other representatives of the US steel industry. I am Keith Busse, President & CEO of Steel Dynamics Inc. (SDI), in Butler, Indiana. SDI is a minimill producing carbon steels utilizing the electric arc furnace production process and thin slab casting to make hot rolled, cold rolled, and galvanized sheet steels. The company, which is one of the nations newest and most efficient steel producers, was established in 1994. We cast our first heat of steel in 1996 and became profitable in only 6 months. Since 1994, SDI has invested over $600 million in equipment, implementing the most advanced technology. This year, we completed the installation of an additional thin slab caster and a new state-of-the-art cold rolling mill. Later this year, SDI will commission a revolutionary new technology to manufacture virgin iron units for consumption in electric arc furnaces at a cost of $90 million. We also anticipate starting construction late this year of a $350 million structural mill, also in Indiana.
SDI is one of the most cost efficient steel producers in the world. We provide 560 high-paying manufacturing jobs at our new mill in Indiana, and hundreds more in related industries. Accordingly, we support free trade flows based on comparative advantage.
I am commenting today on behalf of my company and also for the Steel Manufacturers Association (SMA), the primary trade association of steel minimills, which account for almost half of the steel produced in the US today. The SMA consists of 61 member companies, geographically dispersed across North America, with representation in 88 Congressional districts and 34 states.
The U.S. Steel Industry
The steel industry has undergone a remarkable transformation, beginning in the mid-1980s and continuing today as evidenced by SDI's success. Steel's revival can be attributed in large part to the minimills--efficient, low-cost producers that have grown rapidly during a time when many other steel companies in the US contracted or shut down.
With few exceptions, the minimills have seldom relied solely on US antidumping and countervailing duty laws to challenge unfairly traded imports. Competition is so strong in our end of the business that we believe in exhausting all competitive means available to improve our efficiency, in order to meet importers' prices, rather than just reacting with trade law cases. In the past, we have been successful in meeting or beating our foreign competitors' prices. Events of the past few months, however, have reached crisis proportions, with even the most competitive US steel producers responding to import prices that reflect a desire of certain foreign producers to earn dollars at any price--at selling prices that don't remotely cover their costs of production. Even Nucor, the largest minimill and now the second largest steel company in the US, a company who has long supported a free trade stance, has recently written to members of the Administration complaining about the surge of unfairly traded imports at insane dumped prices. In response to the import surge, Nucor has recently announced two price reductions on hot rolled sheets, steels' most common product, a $50-$60 per ton (16-20%).
the problem
The US steel industry, a highly competitive world-class producer, is being inundated by unfairly traded imports. In one year, from June 1997 to June 1998, steel imports from Japan grew by 113.7%, from Korea, 89.5%, and from Russia, 50.6%. Steel from Russia, Japan, Korea, and other trading partners is being sold in the US today at far below market value, and in some instances below variable cost of production, in the home countries.
The import surge can be specifically linked to the Asian and Russian economic crises. To some extent the crisis is driven by emerging nations whose currencies have been sharply devalued, a crisis that we have never before faced and that our trade laws are not prepared to handle. Collapsing non-market economies where cost accounting is an unknown art is also a major trade problem that can threaten this nation's basic industries. The other driver in this calamity relates to Japan's failed financial programs, which are now substantially affecting it as well as other nearby nations.
A diversion of steel trade into the US is occurring from Asian economies, which are no longer importing steel, and have also lost their own home markets. Other industrial countries have either closed or limited access to their own markets through negotiated bilateral agreements or understandings to limit their steel imports from Asia and Eastern Europe.
The countries in crisis have adopted policies of exporting their way out of their economic mess, at any cost, including selling at prices far below costs of production.
The result is wreaking havoc on the US steel industry--injuring almost every US steel producer, including some of the most competitive steel mills in the world.
The combination of massive tonnages of steel arriving at US ports of entry and the aggressively low prices at which they are being sold has caused intense price distortion across the US steel industry, even during a period of strong domestic demand for steel products. Deteriorating prices have forced US producers to cut back production, slash expenditures, and lay off their own employees in reaction to the flood of imports traded far below market value.
This is not trade based on comparative advantage. We are, in fact, confronted with an economic crisis in the US steel industry, stemming directly from the structural mismanagement by several other governments of their economies.
Inadequacy of US Trade Laws
In time of trouble, the steel industry has often looked to US antidumping and countervailing duty laws to remedy the problems caused by unfairly traded imports. Unfortunately, these remedies take time, and, if successful, often provide relief too late to forestall serious injury from occurring. Furthermore, US trade laws were not designed to address structural failures of economic management by governments, triggering massive currency devaluations or the disruptive incursions of non-market economies in the world steel market.
US trade laws require US steel producers to prove injury before a remedy, in the form of a duty or quota, can be applied. Trade law remedies are limited in scope and may not be able to address effectively the structural economic problems that are contributing to massive import surges.
SMA members do support the maintenance and strict enforcement of our nation's trade laws, as one component of US trade policy. Our trade laws are effective in responding to dumping and subsidization on a product-by-product basis involving a limited number of steel trading partners. Alone, they are insufficient to cope with the structural flood of imports we face today.
Proposed Steps
Neither the US Government nor its steel industry can afford to wait for the trade law process to take its course. Accordingly, we propose the following specific actions, and urge the Congress to request the Administration to implement these measures:
Initiate Bilateral Discussions with Offending Countries
In Russia, steelmakers simply do not know their cost of production. Having visited and talked with many of these producers I can assure you that cost accounting, as we know it, is not an art which is practiced there. US steel industry analysts and US steel companies agree that Russian steel producers are selling at prices that don't remotely cover their costs. Other countries, including Japan, are also engaging in similar predatory behavior in the US market.
US acceptance of undervalued imports is an ineffective way to help these countries obtain hard currency or solve the World's economic crisis.
We respectfully request Members of the Congress to urge the Administration to begin bilateral discussions with the exporting countries currently responsible for the disruptions in the US steel market, with a goal towards establishing voluntary export limitations, similar to those which the European Union has had in place with its East European trading partners.
exercise leverage
Our trade negotiators should use every possible forum to alert our trading partners to the nature and depth of injury their policies are causing the US steel industry.
US trade negotiators should warn of potentially severe steel import limitations emanating from trade cases, and suggest that offending governments and their industries take immediate action to alleviate US market disruptions.
concurrent resolution
Mr. Chairman, and the other Members of the Steel Caucus, we would like to express our appreciation for the concurrent resolution you intend to introduce ``calling on the President to take all necessary measures to respond to the surge of steel imports.'' We shall urge the Members of Congress in those states and districts in which our member companies have plants to support this resolution. In addition, we urge the Congressional Steel Caucus to press the Administration to initiate bilateral discussions with the countries that have caused this problem, in order to provide us with some potential for prompt relief.
Thank you for your continuing support and for the opportunity to address the Congressional Steel Caucus on this urgent matter.
Mr. ADERHOLT. Mr. Speaker, I would like to announce my support of House Resolution 598, introduced by Mr. Traficant. I am pleased that today Members have an opportunity to vote on a tough, reasonable House Resolution addressing this issue.
The leadership has been negotiating almost around the clock with the Clinton administration on the budget, so I appreciate their attention to this also very important matter of aiding the U.S. steel industry.
With all the budget talks going on, why have we members of the Congressional Steel Caucus pressed so hard for a vote on steel in these last days of the session? It is because the U.S. steel industry is in a crisis. It is too late to make leisurely proposals as if we were addressing a problem of the future. The problem is NOW; orders to U.S. steel companies are at 50% of normal NOW; families are out of work NOW.
Some oppose a one-year ban on certain foreign steel products and say that such an action is too strong. Consider these two facts: (1) U.S. companies wishing to file a trade petition about dumping must first spend six months gathering data so that their case will be taken seriously; (2) there is approximately six months of foreign steel currently piled up in ports from Alabama to Maryland to Ohio.
Voting yes on this resolution is the very least we should do as Members of Congress to help a U.S. industry which is unfairly being sacrificed in the name of global stability. I have said before and say again--it is wrong to kill U.S. jobs for the purpose of keeping afloat foreign governments and economies.
The U.S. steel industry has streamlined and modernized. No one can compete against unfair, below production-cost prices. This resolution is similar to my bill H.R. 4762, and I commend Mr. Traficant on his long-term leadership on this issue. Vote yes on this resolution to urge President Clinton to take immediate action. I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. DINGELL. Mr. Speaker, let us be clear, the government of South Korea provided Hanbo Steel with a $6 billion subsidy to continue producing steel. Hanbo is producing the same steel that sits in our ports and results in American steel workers losing their jobs.
Its time we stand up for steel. If the South Koreans protect their workers at our expense, why do we stand back and allow them to continue this illegal act. It is an abomination. This has nothing to do with free trade and whether you support increased trade. This issue is about how we react when other nations take advantage of our strong economy and our market.
Its time to take a stand. I urge all members to support this resolution.
Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Speaker, as a cosponsor of H. Res. 598, I rise to speak in favor of the passage of this resolution, which expresses the sense of the House that provisions of the Trade and Tariff act of 1930 must be vigorously enforced.
We all know that several regions of the world are currently suffering from tremendous economic turmoil. Specifically, East Asia, Russia, and South America have all suffered catastrophic fiscal upheavals causing government and industry to take drastic action to save what little money they have.
One of the actions that countries such as Russia and Brazil have taken is to flood our markets with cheap imports. Those imports include steel, which has had a drastic effect on our industry here at home. Just this year, steel imports from Asia have increased 70%, and Russian importers are enjoying their highest-ever level of steel exports to the United States. The result is that the steel industry here at home has been forced to lower their prices in order to compete--20% in the last three months.
This resolution tries to remedy the situation by asking the government to vigorously enforce treaties that govern this type of trade, such as the Trade and Tariff Act of 1930. Although I am sympathetic to the plight of those countries, we must still vigorously enforce our laws to avoid desuetude and the entrenchment of a policy that does us substantial more harm than good.
H. Res. 598 also calls on the Administration to immediately review, for a period of ten days, the import of hot-rolled steel products into the United States from Japan, Russia, Brazil and numerous other countries that have been accused of dumping. This review would help us collect information that will affirm or deny whether or not these countries have been undercutting our industry.
To further enhance our understanding of the problem, the resolution also asks the Administration to establish a task force which would further investigate our importation practices, as they relate to steel, and verify whether or not our current trade agreements, treaties, and laws are being violated in any way. I applaud this effort, because it provides us with another resource for getting reliable information that is necessary for our assessment of the national economy.
Lastly, the resolution asks the Administration to provide us with a report, early next year, detailing what steps should be taken to ensure the enforcement of our laws and the protection of our steel industry. Hopefully, this report can be used to start a bipartisan and cooperative relationship with the Administration that can be used to make better foreign policy decisions for the benefit of all of our industries.
While we do live in a global economy, we are still a nation of laws--
laws that must be respected and enforced by all who encounter them. I urge all of my colleagues to support this resolution and the American worker.
____________________
