Where Steel Stands - Institute-wide Public Policy Positions

INSTITUTE-WIDE PUBLIC POLICY POSITIONS

While the AISI's Public Policy Handbook states the policy positions of AISI's U.S. producer members, it is important to note that a number of these positions are shared by AISI's Canadian and Mexican producer member companies as well. Following are examples of policy positions supported by the Institute's membership across the Board:

Competitiveness of North American steel industry. All support market-based policies that will enhance the competitiveness of NAFTA steel producers — and steel as the material of choice for manufacturing customers. All oppose policies that will impair the competitiveness of NAFTA steel producers and steel's position vis'-a-vis' competing materials.
Environmental matters. All agree that, on a life cycle basis, steel has many important advantages over competing materials. On global climate change, all support the view that global environmental problems require global — not unilateral — solutions, and all support the need for flexible, non-binding goals — not hard targets — based on good science. On new standards for particulate matter, all support the position that any new standards must be based on common sense, sound science and appropriate cost-benefit and risk analysis.
Electricity policy. Despite the varying roles of government in electricity policy in the NAFTA countries, all members support the concept that customer choice and more open competition in electricity supply — in retail as well as wholesale markets — would enhance the competitiveness of North American producers of steel and steel-intensive products.
Market-distorting government practices: the CAFE example. On Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE) standards, all support ongoing market-based efforts to promote energy-efficient vehicles in keeping with the industry's commitment to energy conservation. All consider CAFE standards to be counterproductive in terms of energy saving, unnecessary government interference in market forces and harmful to NAFTA auto producers. All would like to see CAFE standards frozen at current levels, and all would oppose any efforts to broaden or increase these standards.
A market approach to transportation. On transportation issues in general, all support a deregulated market approach, the goal of increasing efficiency of transportation services, and therefore the need to harmonize truck weight maximums among NAFTA countries.
Proper role and use of international standards. All agree that proposed new International Standards Organization (ISO) standards (e.g., on environmental management and occupational health and safety) should not disadvantage steel as a material or act as a barrier to sales by NAFTA steel producers abroad.
Trade with non-NAFTA countries. All support the need to keep national trade laws effective with respect to unfair trade from non-NAFTA countries, and all support consideration among NAFTA governments of a more coordinated approach to such unfair trade. A case-in-point is the concern that all have recently expressed about NAFTA imports from members of the Commonwealth of Independent States (CIS) — and the possibility of trade diversion due to the European Union's quotas on imports of steel from the CIS. Another common concern is South Korean unfair trade practices affecting price and export controls. On the export side, all support the need to bring down trade barriers in non-NAFTA countries so that world-class North American producers of steel and steel-containing goods (e.g., NAFTA automakers) can increase exports to Asia and other world markets. Finally, all support the view that accession of China and other "economies in transition" to the World Trade Organization should only occur on commercially viable terms.