[Congressional Bills 108th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Res. 441 Introduced in House (IH)]






108th CONGRESS
  1st Session
H. RES. 441

 Condemning the report issued on November 10, 2003, by the World Trade 
   Organization (WTO) dispute settlement Appellate Body in which the 
   Appellate Body determined that imposition by the United States of 
   import restrictions on certain steel products was in violation of 
               international law, and for other purposes.


_______________________________________________________________________


                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                           November 17, 2003

   Mr. English (for himself, Mr. Regula, Ms. Hart, Mr. Aderholt, Mr. 
    Quinn, Mr. Ney, Mr. Houghton, Mr. Wilson of South Carolina, Mr. 
LaTourette, Mr. Hayes, Mr. Brown of South Carolina, Mr. Boehlert, Mrs. 
  Myrick, and Mr. Bishop of Utah) submitted the following resolution; 
         which was referred to the Committee on Ways and Means

_______________________________________________________________________

                               RESOLUTION


 
 Condemning the report issued on November 10, 2003, by the World Trade 
   Organization (WTO) dispute settlement Appellate Body in which the 
   Appellate Body determined that imposition by the United States of 
   import restrictions on certain steel products was in violation of 
               international law, and for other purposes.

Whereas on March 5, 2002, in response to an increase in the imports of certain 
        steel products which were found to cause or threaten to cause serious 
        injury to the United States steel industry, the President imposed import 
        restrictions, or ``safeguard measures'', on the imports of such steel 
        products;
Whereas subsequent to the imposition of the United States safeguard measures, a 
        proceeding was initiated in the World Trade Organization (WTO) to 
        consider the consistency of this action with the Agreement on Safeguards 
        (as described in section 101(d)(13) of the Uruguay Round Agreements 
        Act);
Whereas during the WTO proceeding the European Union (EU) has offered a series 
        of arguments with no basis in law to justify its efforts to retaliate 
        against the United States for its safeguard measures;
Whereas on November 10, 2003, a WTO dispute settlement Appellate Body issued a 
        report on the proceeding that was adverse to the United States;
Whereas subsequent to the issuance of report of the WTO Appellate Body, the 
        European Union and others have threatened immediate retaliation against 
        the United States in the form of counter import restrictions which are 
        clearly inconsistent with the requirements and policy of the Safeguards 
        Agreement and the Understanding on Rules and Procedures Governing the 
        Settlement of Disputes (as described in section 101(d)(16) of the 
        Uruguay Round Agreements Act);
Whereas the European Union has failed to adhere to the requirements of the 
        Understanding on Rules and Procedures Governing the Settlement of 
        Disputes, as agreed to by all WTO member countries, and further has made 
        groundless threats of retaliation in an inappropriate attempt to 
        influence the WTO with respect to the proceeding;
Whereas, in addition, the decision of the WTO Appellate Body does not require 
        repeal of the safeguard measures by the United States but only 
        modification of the measures to conform with the Agreement on 
        Safeguards;
Whereas any action to respond to a report of the WTO that is adverse to the 
        United States may only be taken pursuant to the requirements of section 
        129 of the Uruguay Round Agreements Act, including notification to 
        Congress of administrative action taken pursuant to such section; and
Whereas the WTO dispute settlement process is not working and has been guided by 
        politics rather than by legal principles: Now, therefore, be it
    Resolved, That the House of Representatives--
            (1) condemns as a deliberate interference with the clearly 
        justified right of the United States to protect its own markets 
        against unfair trade practices the adverse report issued by the 
        World Trade Organization (WTO) dispute settlement Appellate 
        Body on the proceeding to determine whether the imposition of 
        import restrictions on certain steel products by the United 
        States on March 5, 2002, was consistent with the Agreement on 
        Safeguards (as described in section 101(d)(13) of the Uruguay 
        Round Agreements Act);
            (2) strongly urges the President to repeal all exclusions 
        to such import restrictions which benefit European Union (EU) 
        steelmakers if the EU retaliates against the United States in 
        the form of counter import restrictions; and
            (3) strongly urges the President to direct the United 
        States Trade Representative to use the voice and vote of the 
        United States at the WTO to ensure that immediate reforms are 
        made to the WTO dispute settlement process to increase its 
        transparency and to ensure that it does not unfairly restrict 
        trade remedy laws, create new obligations, or undermine 
        legitimate trade actions brought by the United States or other 
        WTO member countries.
                                 <all>