THIS SEARCH     THIS DOCUMENT     THIS CR ISSUE     GO TO
Next Hit        Forward           Next Document     New CR Search
Prev Hit        Back              Prev Document     HomePage
Hit List        Best Sections     Daily Digest      Help
                Contents Display    

Mr. BROWN of Ohio. Madam Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding

[Page: H7752]  GPO's PDF

   As thousands of steelworkers have discovered, the United States has become the world's steel dumping ground. During the 1998 steel crisis, steel imports into the United States exceeded steel exports by a record 36 million tons. The trade deficit in steel was a record $11 billion dollars, accounting for nearly 7 percent of our overall trade and growing trade imbalance. The vast majority of these imports were subsidized by foreign governments and dumped at below-market prices in our country.

   The American steel industry relies on anti-dumping laws as their last line of defense against unfairly traded imports. Unfortunately, since the Uruguay Round agreements, the steel industry's ability to defend itself has been severely weakened.

   At the upcoming World Trade Organization ministerial in Doha, Qatar, several nations that export steel to the United States have set the weakening of international rules on trade laws as a major priority to be negotiated. Robert Zoellick, the U.S. Trade Representative, simply cannot be allowed to travel to Qatar and negotiate away the remaining safety measures the steel industry has.

   That is why I support this resolution. Many of us are concerned about this WTO ministerial. We are, first of all, concerned because of the place it is located. It is located in a country which does not allow free elections. It is located in a country which does not allow freedom of expression. It is located in a country where women are treated not much differently from the way women are treated by the Taliban in Afghanistan. It is held in a country where public worship by non-Muslims is banned.

   The message that that sends to people around the world, that the trade ministers are meeting in a city and country where public protests will not be allowed, where free speech is not allowed, where public expression is not allowed, where freedom of worship is not allowed, where free elections are not allowed, is troubling.

   It is troubling because all too often our own trade minister, in this case Mr. Zoellick, has used in the past language to suggest that those of us that do not support his free trade agenda, his agenda to weaken environmental and labor standards around the world, that do not support his agenda are in some way unpatriotic or somewhat indifferent to the counterterrorism efforts promoted by the administration.

   While all of us I believe in Congress support the President's efforts to combat terrorism, both domestically and abroad, we do not subscribe to the values that Mr. Zoellick and others, and in part of the U.S. Trade Representative's office journey to Qatar, tend to suggest.

   That means that we hope coming out of this ministerial, again, even though it is located in a place that sends a message not of freedom, but of much less than that, we hope that the message that comes out of this meeting in Qatar is sort of the opposite of what goes in in terms of the message that holding in Qatar means, that we care about labor standards, environmental standards, free elections, freedom of worship, all the values that we in this country fight for and we in this country hold dear.

   That is another reason I think it is important to join the efforts of the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. LEVIN) and the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. ENGLISH) in support of H. Con. Res. 262. I ask House support for the resolution.

   Mr. LEVIN. Madam Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from Indiana (Mr. VISCLOSKY).

   Mr. VISCLOSKY. Madam Speaker, I appreciate the gentleman yielding me time; and I also want to compliment the gentleman and my good friend, the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. ENGLISH), who has introduced this resolution. The gentleman is the chairman of the Congressional Steel Caucus in the House.

   The resolution that we have here before us today is very important because the industry, as I think all of my colleagues understand, is imploding as we debate this resolution today. I think the first order of business is to make sure that we do not backslide in any way, shape, or form as far as the existing protections that are put into law.

   Why do we need the gentleman's resolution today? First of all, we want to ensure that there is a clear message from the House of Representatives to the new administration that preserving our trade laws as they exist today is a primary focus and of primary importance to us.

   Second, it is clear that some would like to see our antidumping and antisubsidy laws changed, and it is important to also send our trading partners a clear message that we will not tolerate this.

   Finally, some of our strongest allies, because of travel uncertainties, may not be at the WTO conference in the coming week to assist us in ensuring that there is no backsliding on this issue.

   But while I am here to congratulate my good friend, the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. ENGLISH), and to fully support the legislation he has introduced, which I am a cosponsor of, I would also use my time today to remind our colleagues that the task is not yet finished as far as assistance to the domestic steel industry.

   I would point out to my colleagues that Al Tech Specialty Steel Corporation of the State of New York ceased operations on June 29 of this year. Laclede Steel Company in the State of Missouri ceased operation in August this year. I would remind Members that Qualitech Steel in Indiana ceased operations on January 26 of this year. I would remind my colleagues that Gulf States Steel in the State of Alabama ceased operations in this year, the month of January. I would remind my colleagues that on May 18 of this year, Northwestern Steel and Wire, located in the State of Illinois, ceased operations. I would remind my colleagues that CSC Limited in the State of Ohio ceased operations this year. I would further remind my colleagues that Trico Steel also in the State of Alabama ceased operations this year. Great Lakes Metals, Limited, in East Chicago, Indiana, my congressional district, ceased operations in July of this year. Edgewater Steel , Limited, of Oakmont, Pennsylvania, ceased operations on September 28 of this year, as well as Acme Steel Corporation, also of the State of Illinois.

   It is not just companies that have ceased operations. It is not just the 10 million additional tons of steel that are no longer melted and produced in the United States of America that are important to all of us. What is important are the 140 people that lost their job in Pennsylvania on September 28. What is important are the 40 people in East Chicago, Indiana, who lost their jobs this year. What is important are the 320 people in Alabama who lost their jobs this year. What is important is the 1,225 people in Warren, Ohio, who lost their jobs this year, or the 1,600 people who lost their jobs at Northwestern Steel and Wire. What is important are the 1,906 people in Gadsden, Alabama, who lost their jobs this year, or the 350 people who used to have a job at Qualitech Steel in the State of Indiana, or those who also worked at Al Tech Specialty Steel , 790 individuals who lost jobs.

   I would emphasize that these are individual citizens we are here to represent, and those are good-paying jobs with good benefits; and there are families and households and mortgages that attach to this issue.

   We have jobs, we have people, and we have a national defense issue here. Over the last 23 years we have seen 30 million tons of steel capacity closed in the United States of America. In the last 12 to 18 months, we have added another 10 million tons of capacity that have now closed. The problem as I see it is we are the only industrialized Nation on the planet Earth who cannot produce enough steel now to meet our own needs.

   I am very pleased that because of the pressure many of us brought with H.R. 808, that the gentleman is also a cosponsor of, that more than a majority of the House have cosponsored, the administration has initiated an investigation by the ITC.

   The ITC last month found, to no one's surprise, that serious injury has occurred to the domestic steel industry. There is a remedy phase, and then

[Page: H7753]  GPO's PDF

   We have also seen an improvement as far as changing the existing loan guarantee program that was put in place in 1999, increasing that guarantee from 85 percent to 95 percent to give qualified steel companies who have a good business and a reasonable chance of success of making it.

   But the industry also needs financial help. Several weeks ago I attempted to have an amendment offered on the House floor to provide $800 million a year for 3 years to help ameliorate the problems that the industry is facing as far as their legacy costs. My concern is if we do not act between now and the middle of December in this body to provide this industry with those dollars, it will cease to exist.

   I have five major facilities along the southern shore of Lake Michigan. I would not represent to the Speaker or to any of my Members that those facilities are going to disappear. But my great fear on behalf of the people involved, on behalf of the communities involved, and on behalf of our national defense is when they cease to operate, foreign investors will buy parts. They will close all of our melting capacity. We will no longer make steel in the Great Lakes States. We will process steel in the Great Lakes States. I think that would be a travesty, and I would use my time allotted by the gentleman from Michigan to make that point and implore my colleagues to consider the financing that is necessary for the domestic steel industry to solve their problems.

   Mr. LEVIN. Madam Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. CARDIN).

   Mr. CARDIN. Madam Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding me this time and for his leadership on strengthening our antidumping and countervailing duty laws. I thank the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. ENGLISH) for his strong leadership in this area.

   Madam Speaker, I strongly support this resolution. We must make sure that in negotiating in the next trade rounds, that we do not do anything that can compromise our current laws that we have in effect that deal with antidumping and countervailing duties.

   Madam Speaker, I must say we even have to go further than that. We need to strengthen our laws consistent with our World Trade Organization obligations. I think that we need to strengthen those laws. It is interesting that the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. ENGLISH) and the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Levin) are both cosponsors and sponsors of legislation in order to do that.

   The problem is it takes too long to provide relief to industries that have been hurt by dumped products. The steel industry, of course, is a classic example. Too many of our steel companies have gone out of business because it has taken over 3 years since we have had illegal imports for the system to provide the appropriate relief. So we should be talking about strengthening those laws, not weakening them.

   I think this resolution makes it clear that we are going to draw a line in the sand that we are not going to weaken our current protections that we have against illegally dumped steel . It is an important statement for us to go on record.

   I applaud my colleagues for bringing forward this resolution and urge all my colleagues to support it.

   Mr. LEVIN. Madam Speaker, I believe we have covered our position well; and, therefore, I yield back the balance of my time.

   Mr. ENGLISH of Pennsylvania. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

   Madam Speaker, I want to thank the gentlemen who have participated in this debate today, because their presence here has highlighted the importance of this resolution in sending a message to the world that the United States Congress feels very strongly that the U.S. needs to have strong antidumping protections, needs to have a strong trade policy, and is fully prepared to take that position and stress it this coming weekend in Doha.

[Time: 16:00]

   I particularly want to thank the American Iron and Steel Institute for their support of our resolution. I want to thank the Steel Caucus, of which I am chairman and of which the gentleman from Indiana (Mr. VISCLOSKY) is vice chairman. I want to particularly single him out for thanks for his participation not only in this effort, but in all of the efforts of the Steel Caucus and his photo finish appearance on the floor today from traveling. I want to thank the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Levin) for his wisdom and his institutional memory. He has been a major figure in all of our trade debates of the last few years, and we look forward to his major contribution in the coming days to the trade debates that are before us.

   I also want to thank the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. CARDIN), my friend, who has really been an extraordinary advocate of strengthening the antidumping laws, and I have had the privilege of the working with him on this issue now in two different Congresses. I also want to thank the gentleman from Ohio who spoke earlier for giving me the opportunity to correct the record, since he created the impression that this resolution was in some way binding the Bush administration, restricting the Bush administration and the position they might take in the negotiations on the next WTO Round. Nothing could be further from the truth.

   Madam Speaker, what is fairly clear from the record is that this administration has consistently come out against putting our antidumping laws on the chopping block and negotiating them away. They have consistently been advocates of a stronger trade policy for America. They have been consistently willing to stand up for steel . As chairman of the Steel Caucus, I would like to take a moment right now to thank them for having the courage to stand up at considerable political expense in some circles to themselves and being willing to fight for American steel workers, fight for our basic capacity to produce our own steel . That is so fundamental to us as a strategic asset and our American steel -making capacity, if it survives in coming years, will be much through the effort of this Bush administration.

   So Mr. Zoellick, when he goes to Doha, will have a strong record as a friend of steel , as a friend of American workers and American manufacturers, and also as a strong advocate of a firm U.S. position when it comes to the antidumping laws.

   Madam Speaker, in conclusion, I think we all look at the trade issue from the perspective of our local communities. I come from northwestern Pennsylvania, from a community with the largest concentration of manufacturing jobs in our entire State, also the largest concentration of export-related jobs in our State. We have seen a winnowing out of this manufacturing capacity. Over the last few months, we have lost permanently 6 percent of our manufacturing base, and that was before the announcement of just a week ago that International Paper is closing a plant that has sustained our community as a major source of jobs for the last 100 years.

   Madam Speaker, looking at this from northwestern Pennsylvania, we know we have neighbors in need. We know we have workers throughout America who have had good skilled jobs, whose jobs have been at risk; and in many cases, they have recently lost them. Madam Speaker, I imagine many of those workers are at home watching this debate; and I would like to be able to reassure them, send them a strong message, even as we send our trading partners a strong message, that this Congress will not stand by while some of our trading partners try to get us to negotiate away an important part of the trade protections that we are currently allowed to have under international law.

   Madam Speaker, I urge the passage of this resolution to send a strong, bipartisan message that this Congress is committed to a strong trade policy.

   ANNOUNCEMENT BY THE SPEAKER PRO TEMPORE

   The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mrs. BIGGERT). The Chair would remind that all comments should be addressed to the Chair.

   Mr. ENGLISH. Madam Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

   The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the motion offered by the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. ENGLISH) that the House suspend the

[Page: H7754]  GPO's PDF

   The question was taken.

   The SPEAKER pro tempore. In the opinion of the Chair, two-thirds of those present have voted in the affirmative.

   Mr. ENGLISH. Madam Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.

   The yeas and nays were ordered.

   The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to clause 8 of rule XX and the Chair's prior announcement, further proceedings on this motion will be postponed.

<<<

THIS SEARCH     THIS DOCUMENT     THIS CR ISSUE     GO TO
Next Hit        Forward           Next Document     New CR Search
Prev Hit        Back              Prev Document     HomePage
Hit List        Best Sections     Daily Digest      Help
                Contents Display