[Congressional Bills 106th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. Con. Res. 4 Introduced in Senate (IS)]







106th CONGRESS
  1st Session
S. CON. RES. 4

Expressing the sense of Congress that assistance to South Korea should 
be conditioned on South Korea's compliance with its international trade 
   commitments and on South Korea's termination of its unfair trade 
                        practices and subsidies.


_______________________________________________________________________


                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                            January 26, 1999

   Mr. Ashcroft (for himself and Mr. Baucus) submitted the following 
 concurrent resolution; which was referred to the Committee on Finance

_______________________________________________________________________

                         CONCURRENT RESOLUTION


 
Expressing the sense of Congress that assistance to South Korea should 
be conditioned on South Korea's compliance with its international trade 
   commitments and on South Korea's termination of its unfair trade 
                        practices and subsidies.

Whereas Asia is the largest regional export market for America's farmers and 
        ranchers, traditionally purchasing approximately 40 percent of all 
        United States agricultural exports;
Whereas the Department of Agriculture forecasts that over the next year American 
        agricultural exports to Asian countries will decline by several billion 
        dollars due to the Asian financial crisis;
Whereas the United States is the producer of the safest agricultural products 
        from farm to table, customizing goods to meet the needs of customers 
        worldwide, and has established the image and reputation as the world's 
        best provider of agricultural products;
Whereas American farmers and ranchers, and more specifically, American pork and 
        beef producers, are dependent on secure, open, and competitive Asian 
        export markets for their product;
Whereas United States pork and beef producers not only have faced the adverse 
        effects of depreciated and unstable currencies and lowered demand due to 
        the Asian financial crisis, but also have been confronted with South 
        Korea's pork subsidies and its failure to keep commitments on market 
        access for beef;
Whereas it is the policy of the United States to prohibit South Korea from using 
        United States and International Monetary Fund assistance to subsidize 
        targeted industries and compete unfairly for market share against United 
        States products;
Whereas the South Korean Government has been subsidizing its pork exports to 
        Japan, resulting in a 973-percent increase in its exports to Japan since 
        1992, and a 71-percent increase in the last year;
Whereas pork already comprises 70 percent of South Korea's agriculture exports 
        to Japan, yet the South Korean Government has announced plans to invest 
        100,000,000,000 won in its agricultural sector in order to flood the 
        Japanese market with even more South Korean pork;
Whereas the South Korean Ministry of Agriculture and Fisheries reportedly has 
        earmarked 25,000,000,000 won for loans to Korea's pork processors in 
        order for them to purchase more Korean pork and to increase exports to 
        Japan;
Whereas any export subsidies on pork, including those on exports from South 
        Korea to Japan, would violate South Korea's international trade 
        agreements and may be actionable under the World Trade Organization;
Whereas South Korea's subsidies are hindering United States pork and beef 
        producers from capturing their full potential in the Japanese market, 
        which is the largest export market for United States pork and beef, 
        importing nearly $700,000,000 of United States pork and over 
        $1,500,000,000 of United States beef last year alone;
Whereas under the United States-Korea 1993 Record of Understanding on Market 
        Access for Beef, which was negotiated pursuant to a 1989 GATT Panel 
        decision against Korea, South Korea was allowed to delay full 
        liberalization of its beef market (in an exception to WTO rules) if it 
        would agree to import increasing minimum quantities of beef each year 
        until the year 2001;
Whereas South Korea fell woefully short of its beef market access commitment for 
        1998; and
Whereas United States pork and beef producers are not able to compete fairly 
        with Korean livestock producers, who have a high cost of production, 
        because South Korea has violated trade agreements and implemented 
        protectionist policies: Now, therefore, be it
    Resolved by the Senate (the House of Representatives concurring), 
That Congress--
            (1) believes strongly that while a stable global 
        marketplace is in the best interest of America's farmers and 
        ranchers, the United States should seek a mutually beneficial 
        relationship without hindering the competitiveness of American 
        agriculture;
            (2) calls on South Korea to abide by its trade commitments;
            (3) calls on the Secretary of the Treasury to instruct the 
        United States Executive Director of the International Monetary 
        Fund to promote vigorously policies that encourage the opening 
        of markets for beef and pork products by requiring South Korea 
        to abide by its existing international trade commitments and to 
        reduce trade barriers, tariffs, and export subsidies;
            (4) calls on the President and the Secretaries of Treasury 
        and Agriculture to monitor and report to Congress that 
        resources will not be used to stabilize the South Korean market 
        at the expense of United States agricultural goods or services; 
        and
            (5) requests the United States Trade Representative and the 
        United States Department of Agriculture to continue bilateral 
        consultations with the Government of South Korea on its failure 
        to abide by its international trade commitments on beef market 
        access, to consider whether Korea's reported plans for 
        subsidizing its pork industry would violate any of its 
        international trade commitments, and to determine what impact 
        Korea's subsidy plans would have on United States agricultural 
        interests, especially in Japan.
                                 <all>