[House Hearing, 118 Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]


                   FIELD HEARING ON TRADE IN AMERICA:
                 SECURING SUPPLY CHAINS AND PROTECTING
                   THE AMERICAN WORKER_STATEN ISLAND

=======================================================================

                                HEARING

                               BEFORE THE

                      COMMITTEE ON WAYS AND MEANS
                        HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                    ONE HUNDRED EIGHTEENTH CONGRESS

                             FIRST SESSION

                               __________

                               MAY 9, 2023

                               __________

                           Serial No. 118-15

                               __________

         Printed for the use of the Committee on Ways and Means
         
[GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABL IN TIFF FORMAT]

                                ________

                   U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE                    
54-351                      WASHINGTON : 2024                    
          
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------  


                      COMMITTEE ON WAYS AND MEANS

                    JASON SMITH, Missouri, Chairman
                    
VERN BUCHANAN, Florida               RICHARD E. NEAL, Massachusetts
ADRIAN SMITH, Nebraska               LLOYD DOGGETT, Texas
MIKE KELLY, Pennsylvania             MIKE THOMPSON, California
DAVID SCHWEIKERT, Arizona            JOHN B. LARSON, Connecticut
DARIN LaHOOD, Illinois               EARL BLUMENAUER, Oregon
BRAD WENSTRUP, Ohio                  BILL PASCRELL, Jr., New Jersey
JODEY ARRINGTON, Texas               DANNY DAVIS, Illinois
DREW FERGUSON, Georgia               LINDA SANCHEZ, California
RON ESTES, Kansas                    BRIAN HIGGINS, New York
LLOYD SMUCKER, Pennsylvania          TERRI SEWELL, Alabama
KEVIN HERN, Oklahoma                 SUZAN DelBENE, Washington
CAROL MILLER, West Virginia          JUDY CHU, California
GREG MURPHY, North Carolina          GWEN MOORE, Wisconsin
DAVID KUSTOFF, Tennessee             DAN KILDEE, Michigan
BRIAN FITZPATRICK, Pennsylvania      DON BEYER, Virginia
GREG STEUBE, Florida                 DWIGHT EVANS, Pennsylvania
CLAUDIA TENNEY, New York             BRAD SCHNEIDER, Illinois
MICHELLE FISCHBACH, Minnesota        JIMMY PANETTA, California
BLAKE MOORE, Utah
MICHELLE STEEL, California
BETH VAN DUYNE, Texas
RANDY FEENSTRA, Iowa
NICOLE MALLIOTAKIS, New York
MIKE CAREY, Ohio
                       Mark Roman, Staff Director
                 Brandon Casey, Minority Chief Counsel
                                 ------                                

                         C  O  N  T  E  N  T  S

                              ----------                              S0
483

                           OPENING STATEMENTS

                                                                   Page
Hon. Jason Smith, Missouri, Chairman.............................     1
Hon. Richard Neal, Massachusetts, Ranking Member.................     2
Advisory of May 9, 2023 announcing the hearing...................     V

                                WITNESS

John Atkins, President, Global Containers Terminal...............     6
Dale Hemminger, Owner/Operator, Hemdale Farms Dairy and 
  Greenhouses....................................................    17
Nury Turkel, Chair, United States International Religious Freedom    31
John Romano, CEO, Tronox.........................................    46
Thomas O'Shei, President, United Steel Workers Local 135.........    53

                    LOCAL SUBMISSIONS FOR THE RECORD

Local Submissions................................................   126

                   PUBLIC SUBMISSIONS FOR THE RECORD

Public Submissions...............................................   131


[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]	


 
                      HEARING ON TRADE IN AMERICA:
                 SECURING SUPPLY CHAINS AND PROTECTING
                   THE AMERICAN WORKER--STATEN ISLAND

                              ----------                              


                          TUESDAY, MAY 9, 2023

                          House of Representatives,
                               Committee on Ways and Means,
                                                    Washington, DC.
    The committee met, pursuant to call, at 10:02 a.m., at the 
Global Containers Terminal, 300 Western Avenue, Staten Island, 
New York, Hon. Jason Smith [chairman of the committee] 
presiding.
    Chairman SMITH. The committee will come to order.
    Welcome to today's field hearing of the Ways and Means 
Committee about the future of America's trade policy.
    I am told that this field hearing is the first outside full 
committee hearing in a hundred years in Congress. And to do 
that in Staten Island, we are blessed to be here with Ms. 
Nicole Malliotakis in her beautiful district.
    As America's front door to the world, New York City and 
ports like the one here at Staten Island represent the front 
lines of America's global trade. Last year, the total value of 
U.S. goods traded was approximately $5.3 trillion. That 
includes food from our farmers, the energy in our homes, the 
medical equipment in our hospitals, and everything in between.
    There isn't a single worker, family, or business in our 
country that isn't impacted by trade, some positively and some 
negatively.
    Unfortunately, bad trade policies in Washington have 
allowed foreign countries to take advantage of our workers and 
destroy American jobs. Last year, our trade deficit reached 
$945 billion, the largest ever.
    The American worker should be at the center of our trade 
policy. That is why the Ways and Means Committee is here today 
to listen to Americans on the front lines about how we can 
revitalize fair trade in America.
    During the hearing, we will be passing around notebooks 
that you will see right over here. I would like to ask all of 
our audience members to please share your thoughts about how 
Congress can improve U.S. trade policies. We want to hear from 
you, and we want that submitted into the record.
    One key step is to secure our supply chains. We must reduce 
our dependency on nations who do not share our values or have 
aligned interests.
    To be clear, a country that cannot supply their own demand 
for food, energy, and medicine, but instead rely on other 
nations to fulfill those basic needs, they are no longer 
independent, but they are politically dependent. That means 
producing more of our own medicine and energy, and where we 
can't make it here, ensuring that we are sourcing from allies 
close to home.
    For our food supply, it means making sure our farmers are 
viable and able to make a living off the land and sell 
American-grown products without facing nontariff barriers 
around the world.
    We need to aggressively enforce the commitments our trading 
partners made to treat U.S. products fairly. We must build on 
the progress from USMCA by pushing more trading partners to 
open their markets so our farmers and small businesses can 
compete and win.
    American families, they need results. We must use trade 
enforcement tools to chart a new path forward, to put American 
workers first and to hold accountable bad actors, including 
China.
    To do that, Congress must reassert its constitutional role 
as the lead in U.S. trade policy. Right now, the administration 
is trying to work around Congress and create so-called 
frameworks that lack the force of law.
    Congress needs to shine a light on China's human rights 
abuses and predatory trade practices. China is forging ahead 
with an aggressive trade agenda that cheats America, shapes the 
global playing field in its favor, and threatens key American 
supply chains and the livelihoods of American farmers and 
American workers.
    What should be now clear to everyone here today is that 
what our country needs is a smart and strategic decoupling from 
China.
    Workers and small businesses being harmed by China's unfair 
trade practices have been overlooked and forgotten for way too 
long. They expect us to go further and to use the tools at our 
disposal to level the playing field for workers, farmers, and 
job creators. We are here to make sure the future of U.S. trade 
includes their voices.
    I would like to introduce our witnesses for today's 
hearing. Dale Hemminger is a second-generation owner and 
operator of Hemdale Farms Dairy and Greenhouses in Ontario 
County. John Atkins, our host today, is the president of Global 
Containers Terminal USA. Nury Turkel is the first U.S.-educated 
Uyghur-American lawyer and human rights advocate who serves as 
the chair of the U.S. Commission on International Religious 
Freedom. John Romano, CEO of Tronox. And Thomas O'Shei, 
president of the United Steelworkers Local 135.
    I want to thank our witnesses for taking time away from 
their families and their busy schedules to share your stories 
and ideas.
    And I am pleased to recognize the gentleman from 
Massachusetts, the ranking member, Mr. Neal, for his opening 
statement.
    Mr. NEAL. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I want to thank you for 
joining with our witnesses today and holding this hearing.
    President Biden and congressional Democrats continue to 
push an economic and trade agenda that is focused not only on 
building the economy, but that benefits all members of the 
working families in America and across our great country. 
Democrats have charted the course for a worker-centric trade 
policy for well over a decade.
    I want to thank those of you who were responsible for 
putting up the banners here today. We are indeed very grateful 
for the reminder that we want all to prosper because of 
American trade agreements.
    House Democrats, with leadership of this committee, paved 
the way for the May 10 agreement which brought labor and 
environmental provisions to the core of the U.S. trade 
agreements and made them enforceable for the first time.
    Democrats have continued to build on the successes of the 
May 10 agreement. Most recently, Ways and Means Democrats 
demanded the prior administration renegotiate, and we did with 
the USMCA to enforce these trade agreements.
    We ultimately led to a successful agreement that updated 
NAFTA, the most pro-worker trade agreement ever based on the 
renegotiation, with new facility-specific labor enforcement 
mechanisms to address violations of worker rights in Mexico.
    The Biden administration has used this new mechanism eight 
times to address labor issues that are in front of us.
    I know something about that agreement. I was the lead 
negotiator on it. And I want to say that in the end, 195 
Democrats voted for that trade agreement; 194 Republicans voted 
for it. Jimmy Hoffa endorsed it. Rich Trumka endorsed it. And 
the Republican Representative, Bob Lighthizer, did a great job 
on that trade agreement because he agreed with us on the 
enforcement of these agreements.
    We understand that U.S. trade policies should not come at 
the expense of American jobs or the rights of workers at home 
and abroad. That is why committee Democrats have championed the 
Uyghur Enforcement Act to prohibit the import of products made 
with forced labor by the Uyghur people in Xinjiang, China. We 
believe that no supply chain should contain products made with 
forced labor.
    We know trade, when coupled with the right domestic 
economic policies, can play an important role in creating new 
jobs and supporting a thriving economy.
    The U.S. should open its market to fair trade. When 
countries can, we all benefit.
    For this reason, committee Democrats have led the charge to 
reauthorize and reform the Trade Adjustment Assistance Act for 
workers, commonly known as TAA, because we don't think that we 
should leave American workers behind as a result of increased 
trade with other countries. We need to convince our colleagues 
on the other side that TAA is really important.
    Committee Democrats are committed to delivering for the 
American worker by creating necessary policies that will be a 
benefit to them.
    In this vein, House Democrats included TAA in the America 
COMPETES Act, the most expansive pro-worker legislation to 
combat China's unfair trade practices in years. This 
legislation, which we passed last year, would strengthen U.S. 
trade laws and invest in America's workers while boosting 
Americans' economic opportunities.
    Our colleagues on the other side, they need to help us 
pursue these policies so that we don't do things to the 
detriment of American workers.
    Let me be clear, the other side has proposed to slash the 
budgets of Federal agencies that administer and enforce these 
trade laws, in some cases by up to 22 percent. These budget 
cuts to U.S. Customs and Border Protection will not be helpful 
to the Department of Commerce and other agencies that promote 
small businesses. We want to make sure that these cuts don't 
take place.
    I urge all the members of this committee to ensure that 
American workers, farmers, and businesses have the tools they 
need to compete in a global economy. President Biden and 
congressional Democrats have delivered for the American people.
    I was delighted this morning when Mr. Atkins mentioned the 
CHIPS issue. It is happening because of the legislation that we 
helped to pass.
    As a result of the bipartisan infrastructure law, $9.3 
billion is going to go directly to New York to invest in roads, 
bridges, transit, ports and airports, and other opportunities 
for clean water across the region. These historic investments 
will reach communities across the entire country, including 
rural America and underserved populations.
    Federal investments in tax credits championed by Democrats 
on this committee in the Inflation Reduction Act will also 
drive New York's clean energy transition and create jobs to 
take us on a path to net-zero emissions.
    Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for offering us this opportunity 
and allowing our witnesses to share their expertise and 
experience with us.
    Chairman SMITH. Thank you, Mr. Neal.
    I am pleased to recognize the gentlelady from New York, Ms. 
Malliotakis, for 5 minutes.
    Ms. MALLIOTAKIS. Thank you, Chairman Smith, Ranking Member 
Neal, members of the committee, and welcome to Staten Island. 
We are the site of the 1776 Peace Conference during the 
Revolutionary War. Fort Wadsworth was used by the British as 
their prime defense location. It is where tennis was first 
introduced in the United States in 1874. And Sandy Ground is 
the Nation's oldest free settlement for African Americans.
    You may have seen Staten Island on the big screen if you 
watched ``Easy Money,'' ``Working Girl,'' ``The Godfather,'' 
``Saturday Night Fever.'' We are birthplace to Pete Davidson 
and ``The Impractical Jokers.'' And we, of course, are home to 
the iconic Staten Island Ferry and what I would argue is the 
best cannoli in the United States of America, which we will 
have for you to try later this morning.
    I would like to thank the chairman for choosing Staten 
Island as the setting for the first field hearing on trade in 
America. It is my hope that this experience gives members of 
the committee a new perspective on New York City and reveals 
the vital role that our ports fulfill when looking at American 
trade policy and practice.
    We are standing in one of the largest harbors in the world. 
From 1892 to 1924, over 12 million immigrants passed through 
Ellis Island to become American citizens and strengthen this 
great Nation.
    New York City is and always will be a hub for American 
trade, going back to 1613 when the Dutch established fur 
trading posts in both Manhattan and Staten Island. And trade 
will always be a cornerstone of our Nation's economy.
    Today, these historic waters make up the largest container 
port on the East Coast and the second largest in the country. 
In the first 3 months of 2023, the Port of New York and New 
Jersey was the Nation's second-busiest port, moving nearly 1.8 
million containers, and last year it moved $271 billion worth 
of goods.
    Our community is excited that this container terminal is 
planning to increase its capacity by 65 percent through 2027 
and double by 2030.
    And it is because of both private investment and Federal 
funding for infrastructure and dredging by the Army Corps of 
Engineers that larger vessels and more service options for 
goods coming and going will be possible in the future. And I 
will work with everyone here to make sure our waters are ready 
for larger vessels and the positive impact that they will 
bring.
    But in order for the local and national economy to truly 
reap the benefits of these investments, we must have a pro-
growth tax and trade agenda, and that is exactly what our House 
Republicans are focused on.
    While this terminal highlights positive recovery and 
avoidance of pandemic era headaches, consumer patterns have 
undoubtedly changed, and global supply chains continue to 
shift.
    Though the Port of New York and New Jersey has received a 
slight increase in container processing, future freight orders 
seem to point to a freight slowdown in conjunction with an 
economic contraction and stalling economy under President 
Biden.
    One area where we feel that we can lead as the Ways and 
Means Committee, and there is great potential to grow our GDP, 
is exports.
    The U.S. became energy independent and a net exporter for 
the first time in modern history under the Trump 
administration, and the U.S.-Mexico-Canada Agreement passed 
with bipartisan support has increased our region's 
competitiveness in the global economy.
    Now our committee is working to reduce our dependency on 
China by enacting pro-growth and trade policies, strengthening 
trade relationships with those who share our values to bring 
critical supply chains for energy, pharmaceuticals, and 
technology home where we can and work with our allies, not our 
adversaries, where we can't.
    To protect our economy and our national security, Americans 
cannot be at the mercy of a nation that can weaponize these 
life-sustaining resources against us, as we have seen Russia do 
to Europe with energy.
    It is time to work to eliminate trade barriers, restore 
fair trade agreements with our closest allies, provide new 
markets for American products, create jobs for American 
workers, and fill this container terminal.
    I look forward to hearing today's testimony and working 
with my colleagues from both sides of the aisle to accomplish 
these goals.
    Thank you.
    Chairman SMITH. Thank you, Ms. Malliotakis.
    I would like to introduce our witnesses.
    Mr. John Atkins, our host today, is the president of Global 
Containers Terminal USA.
    We have Mr. Dale Hemminger, who is a second-generation 
owner and operator of Hemdale Farms Dairy and Greenhouses in 
Ontario County.
    We have Mr. Nury Turkel. He is the first U.S.-educated 
Uyghur-American lawyer and human rights advocate, who serves as 
the chair of the U.S. Commission on International Religious 
Freedom.
    We have Mr. John Romano, who is the co-CEO of Tronox.
    And then Mr. Thomas O'Shei is the president of United 
Steelworkers Local 135.
    The committee has received your written statements, and 
they will all be made part of the formal hearing record.
    I also want to let others in attendance know that they too 
may provide a written statement. Please find the clipboards 
that we will be passing out throughout the hearing available, 
and your statements will be added to the record when submitted.
    Now for our guests. You each have 5 minutes to deliver your 
oral remarks.
    Mr. Atkins, you may begin.

STATEMENT OF JOHN ATKINS, PRESIDENT, GLOBAL CONTAINERS TERMINAL

    Mr. ATKINS. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Good morning. And I 
want to thank the committee for coming to GCT New York for its 
meeting. We are all here today because trade is all our 
livelihood.
    My name is John Atkins. I have worked in the marine cargo 
handling industry, which is reliant on the trading 
relationships of the United States, for 38 years, president of 
GCT USA, which operates two Green Marine-certified terminals, 
both here in Bayonne and also at our site here in New York.
    I am also chairman of the Sustainable Terminal Services. It 
is a nonprofit corporation composed of the six container 
terminal operators in the Port of New York and New Jersey whose 
primary purpose is to promote environmentally sensitive, 
efficient, and secure marine terminal operations in the port.
    While we are all competitors, we put the competitive spirit 
aside to focus on collective projects that have been 
implemented for the betterment of the port as a whole.
    These projects focus on environmental issues, both physical 
and cybersecurity, and supply chain fluidity through 
information sharing. The containment terminal operators can 
only work together to pursue these port-wide goals through the 
authorities granted through a discussion agreement filed with 
and approved by the Federal Maritime Commission. This 
discussion agreement provides limited antitrust immunity for 
discussions of this nature among the marine terminal operators.
    This arrangement is under attack, and we urge your support 
to preserve this tool that allows marine terminal operators to 
act together for the collective good.
    The businesses and labor serving this port have always 
stepped up in performing the functions that are vital to the 
regional and national economy, as well as the well-being of all 
Americans.
    I am particularly proud of the performance of management 
and longshore workers during the challenges of the COVID-19 
pandemic. In uncertain times, they came to work every day and 
kept the cargo flowing.
    This was not easy, but in cooperation with the ILA, the 
marine terminal operators in the port were able to implement 
reasonable work rules and sanitizing procedures that permitted 
work to go on in a responsible manner.
    These workers are the unsung heroes of the pandemic. 
Because of these workers, the Nation was able to obtain PPE and 
supplies needed to permit people to go to stores and other 
places of business to get the economy moving.
    Collectively, the marine terminal operators in the Port of 
New York and New Jersey have invested billions of dollars in 
facility improvements and equipment to efficiently handle 
current and enhanced cargo volumes.
    In 2022, in the port, we efficiently handled cargo volumes, 
9.5 million TEUs, that had not been anticipated to occur until 
2030.
    However, the story of our significant investment and 
dedication to the work are not what you have read about in the 
news. In general, media coverage has done our industry a great 
disservice, and our industry fears that this misrepresentation 
may be fueling hasty governmental regulation which, while 
considered with good intentions, may have unforeseen and 
harmful consequences.
    The media reporting on the 2022 supply chain crisis often 
used venues like you see here today as visuals in their news 
accounts.
    This reporting has been harmful to the industry because it 
gave legislators and the public the mistaken impression that 
the crisis was caused by ocean carriers transporting goods and 
marine terminal operators, like the one here today, that 
offload the cargo from these vessels and transfer it to truck 
and rail to its final destination.
    This mistaken impression also brought forth the ire of the 
White House, which resulted in hastily enacted legislation that 
will not prevent but may encourage the next supply chain 
crisis.
    The Ocean Shipping Reform Act, or as we term OSRA, and the 
insuring regulations of the FMC, have sought to lay the blame 
for supply chain challenges on ocean carriers and MTOs. This 
regulatory activity places undue burdens on carriers and MTOs 
for the failure of shippers and other cargo interests to 
receive their cargo in a timely manner.
    It is an undisputed fact that domestic marine terminals 
have limited space. The efficient operations of a marine 
terminal are based on principles of velocity and fluidity.
    Impediments to fluidity are long container dwell times. 
During the 2022 supply chain crises, cargo interests allowed 
their containers to languish at our facilities causing logjams 
in the system. Our marine terminals were used as long-term 
storage alternatives to off-terminal container depots and 
warehouse facilities.
    Now the regulators are placing the burden on MTOs to bear 
the cost for such long dwell containers. That is against the 
incentive principle that the FMC is supposed to espouse in 
ensuring that cargo moves efficiently through marine terminals. 
The longer container dwell on the terminal, the longer it takes 
to service the trucks that drop them off and pick them up.
    However, pending FMC regulations do not enumerate 
procedures for the FMC to assess whether the cargo interest 
was, in fact, verifiably ready and able with a truck driver, a 
chassis, and a destination to bring the container before a 
container can be retrieved. Instead, they place the sole burden 
on ocean carriers and marine terminal operators for the 
inefficiencies in the inland components of the supply chain.
    Another issue of critical importance to the Port of New 
York and New Jersey is dredging, which includes having a 
reliable source of funding for critical dredging projects. The 
port is dependent on a consistent program of maintenance and 
deepening dredging projects.
    The Port of New York and New Jersey, in dredging parlance, 
is referred to as a donor port to the Harbor Maintenance Trust 
Fund. That means the fees generated by cargo operations here 
significantly outweigh the moneys that are allocated to the 
port here in New York for vital dredging projects.
    As this port has done since the beginning of our Nation, as 
Nicole has pointed out, it continues to be one of the largest 
contributors to this Nation's ability to maintain the waterways 
for the common good.
    The Port of New York and New Jersey is having issues with 
obtaining the funds that were supposed to be authorized for its 
piles and fender dredging project under WRDA 2020. The port 
should have been slated to get $56 million for this maintenance 
dredging with escalations up to $70 million. However, the port 
was only authorized for $6.1 million for this purpose because 
of differences between what was negotiated and what was 
appropriated under WRDA.
    We need your help. If not corrected, the port will take a 
$350 million hit on dredging funds that should be authorized 
for this port.
    We understand that the problem is expanding the use for 
Harbor Maintenance Trust Fund to secondary sources like locks 
and levees and beach refurbishment. However, this is against 
the principle that harbor maintenance fees generated in ports 
should inure to the benefit of those ports.
    Please help the port maintain its position as an economic 
engine for this region and the Nation and release money being 
held in the Harbor Maintenance Trust Fund.
    As stated, the domestic marine cargo handling industry is 
dependent on this country's trade with other nations. We 
understand that this is a complex issue with certain nations 
acting in a belligerent manner towards the United States.
    However, the foreign and trade policy of the United States 
must be mindful of the quandary that it places the domestic 
cargo handling industry, particularly as it pertains to issues 
related to sustainability.
    This is another area that is of great significance to 
marine terminal operators, which is also directly related to 
the work of your committee. We all want to be good stewards of 
the environment and operate in a manner that has the least 
possible negative impact on the environment. However, obtaining 
new equipment from container gantry cranes, as you see behind 
you, to yard hostlers is a challenge for marine terminal 
operators.
    While most of our container cranes are now electrified, 
operators are in the process of seeking to replace cargo-
handling equipment, including rubber tire gantry cranes, top 
loaders, reach stackers, with low-emission or zero-emission 
equipment.
    Chairman SMITH. Mr. Atkins.
    Mr. ATKINS. Yes.
    Chairman SMITH. We are at 4 minutes over. So, can we submit 
the rest of your testimony into the record?
    Mr. ATKINS. Yes.
    Chairman SMITH. Because I want to make sure I am as fair to 
all of the folks.
    Mr. ATKINS. Okay.
    Chairman SMITH. But we appreciate you hosting us.
    Mr. ATKINS. Absolutely. Thank you.
    [The statement of Mr. Atkins follows:]
    [GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]	
    
    Chairman SMITH. Mr. Hemminger, would you please proceed?

  STATEMENT OF DALE HEMMINGER, OWNER/OPERATOR, HEMDALE FARMS 
                     DAIRY AND GREENHOUSES

    Mr. HEMMINGER. Hemdale Farms and Greenhouses produces milk 
for the Upstate Milk Cooperative. We are one of the owners and 
the only supplier of fresh milk for Wegmans Food Markets. They 
are very fussy. We also grow transplants to start vegetables 
for ourselves and 20 other farms.
    And then we grow a lot of cabbage. We have cabbage year-
round. We ship 50 loads a week with a neighboring farm July 
through November and then about 10 loads a week November 
through June to fussy buyers that want our dense, crisp cabbage 
out of storage.
    Back home, my son and a great team of dedicated, 
hardworking employees are running a 1,500-cow high-tech dairy, 
as well as a greenhouse business that starts vegetables for 
transplants, 3,000 acres of crops, including fresh vegetables. 
I am proud to say that, besides myself, we have five of our key 
six managers that are partners, owners.
    International trade is of critical importance to our 
business. For the dairy industry, nearly 1 in 5 gallons of milk 
gets exported as a dairy product. This value is $10 billion a 
year. In the last 10 years, dairy exports have increased 52 
percent by volume and 85 percent by dollars.
    Thirty years ago, my farm was primarily a processing 
vegetable farm, and we had an outdated, older, 100-cow dairy 
that my father had planned to sell off. Instead, I went to the 
bank and borrowed the money to expand to 300 cows, and that 
barn is still an important part of our operation today.
    At that time, the Canadian dairy market was scheduled to 
open under the original NAFTA agreement. It was actually a 
factor in my decision to expand my dairy.
    Over the last 30 years, the Canadian dairy industry has 
masterly outsmarted numerous trade agreements keeping their 
markets mostly closed to U.S. products. I am just 90 miles from 
the bridge to get into Canada, and just a little bit past that 
is Toronto, big population.
    Currently, I compete to sell large volumes of both 
vegetable transplants, and fresh vegetables with the same 
production grown in Canada. The primary supplier of fresh 
vegetable plants in the Northeast is Canadian greenhouses. I am 
one of the few larger-sized greenhouses that have tried to be 
as competitive with them because of all the opportunities they 
have.
    Canadians' subsidies, including trucking for export 
subsidies, investments grants, and government-controlled, low-
cost inputs like energy make them more competitive.
    I respect my Canadian greenhouse competitors. We make each 
other better. Now Canada must let us send our dairy products 
and vegetables back to the same open borders.
    On the input side of our business, last year was the 
craziest year of my 45-year career, led by fertilizer prices 
that were up 100 to 300 percent and fuel prices that were up 70 
to 100 percent.
    Today, fertilizer has settled back to an average of 70 to 
80 percent higher than 2021. It hasn't settled back further, my 
supplier tells me, because Russia and China are internally 
restricting exports, keeping supplies tight worldwide, and, 
hence, prices historically high. Fuel prices are back to a more 
traditional range.
    Almost all other costs are higher, including machinery, 
repair parts, and some supplies. Moving forward, our biggest 
challenge to remain competitive is labor.
    Our first labor challenge is the Federal H-2A program that 
I have participated in since its inception 15 years ago. The 
current administration has led the U.S. Department of Labor to 
be out of control with regulations, fees, and base wage 
requirements.
    Canada and Mexico are increasing production knowing they 
can produce many products cheaper than those of us in the 
United States trying to do that with these labor costs.
    My second labor issue is New York's new labor laws and 
regulations that are making our costs much higher than 
neighboring States and Canada. In 2023, when I pay the New York 
State mandated overtime for agriculture that was new 2 years 
ago, the Federal H-2A hourly rate of $16.95 an hour, when I pay 
overtime on those dollars, my labor costs will be double what 
Canada pays with no overtime mandated.
    Last Friday, during a statewide meeting of Farm Bureau 
leaders reviewing the new labor regulations that were just 
enacted with the new New York State budget, an apple farmer 
that I have great respect for said he and his neighbors were 
organizing to entertainment solar project development on their 
farm acreage. This is on some of the best fruit acreage in the 
world. Picture the beautiful land that borders Lake Ontario in 
western New York being converted from apple trees to solar 
panels.
    At Hemdale Farms we are focused on soil-based solutions. 
Thirty years ago, my primary focus was growing vegetables for 
processing for Birdseye Foods. A combination of the 
consolidation of the industry and the high cost of doing 
business in New York State forced Birdseye to sell all of its 
processing plants, and today they are importing a considerable 
amount of their products from countries with much lower costs.
    I share this because at that time Birdseye asked me to 
transition some acreage to organic so they could do test 
marketing. The Birdseye markets didn't develop, but we 
established numerous markets for both vegetables and grain and 
were successful organic growers for 15 years.
    Eventually, my operations manager/partner, who is a self-
trained soil health expert, and I decided to discontinue 
organic production because of ongoing challenges maintaining 
the land and controlling weeds and establishing seed growth 
with excess tillage.
    We also wanted to be able to consider GMO use in all of our 
enterprises. My lifetime of experience has me convinced that 
GMOs are the most important scientific breakthrough in history 
for the future of feeding a hungry world of 8 billion people.
    I will wrap this up saying that Hemdale Farms is up to the 
challenge of competing in global markets. We will continue to 
move forward with an entrepreneurial spirit finding our niches 
to succeed. However, we must have a level playing field with 
open markets and cost structure where we can be competitive 
with both our income and expenses.
    If this is not the case, I owe it to my family and my 
community to change my focus and possibly my location. Money 
goes where money can be made.
    Chairman Smith and committee members, I commend you for 
convening this hearing on behalf of agriculture and small 
business across the country.
    Thank you.
    [The statement of Mr. Hemminger follows:]
    [GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]	
    
    Chairman SMITH. Thank you, sir.
    Mr. Turkel, you are recognized.

 STATEMENT OF NURY TURKEL, CHAIR, UNITED STATES INTERNATIONAL 
                       RELIGIOUS FREEDOM

    Mr. TURKEL. Thank you very much, Chairman Smith, Ranking 
Member Neal, and honorable members of the committee. I am 
honored to be here with you today to testify on key red flags 
in our trade relationship with China.
    In 2019, as leaked documents showed, the Xinjiang 
government supercharged its policy to put all Uyghurs in a 
mandatory work placement. To be clear, it is a state policy 
that all Uyghurs must be in forced labor. Acting on forced 
labor imports is a moral imperative as the Uyghur genocide has 
entered its seventh year.
    American consumers are increasingly aware that our 
proclaimed national values are not aligning with U.S. corporate 
interests abroad. Ignoring modern day slavery is morally 
unacceptable. It compromises the soul of our Nation and sets a 
malign precedent globally.
    I was born in a reeducation camp where my mother was sent 
to at the height of China's infamous Cultural Revolution. My 
father had been sent to a separate forced labor camp. I grew up 
witnessing Uyghur villagers forced to build irrigation systems 
and pick cotton. Uyghur forced labor is not a new problem.
    The return of reeducation camps and forced labor to an 
industrial scale is a morally abhorrent practice that demands a 
response backed by political will.
    The Chinese Government is using forced labor to break up 
Uyghur families and send them to work in factories thousands of 
miles away from home. These Uyghurs are prisoners of the state, 
and their labor is being used to make products for domestic and 
international markets.
    Uyghurs are suffering under the state plan targeting ethno-
religious groups for industrial forced labor on a scale not 
seen since the Holocaust era. Forced labor is driving the near 
complete erasure of Uyghur people within a generation. This 
practice is at the profit-making center of atrocity crimes.
    I am sure you can imagine the psychological impact on me, 
as a proud American, to know that my country is profiting from 
the Uyghur forced labor. Knowing that my own dollars might be 
spent on goods produced with the slavery of my own friends and 
people is a sick and cruel reality.
    The problem is not going to disappear or even be minimized. 
As China becomes more hostile to foreign businesses and as the 
means of concealing the origin of goods continue to evolve, 
effective enforcement from the relevant authorities will be 
essential to protect our Nation's economic interests. Forced 
labor transfers within China and beyond will likewise 
necessitate closer scrutiny. And American workers are at a 
disadvantage when competing with countries that use forced 
labor.
    Let's be clear, forced labor is the profit-making dimension 
of an ongoing genocide. Business complicity must be taken 
completely off the table.
    Modern day state-imposed slave labor in China is America's 
number one source of imports. The existing laws must be fully 
enforced and even amended to ensure that the American people 
are not unwittingly complicit in powering a genocide with their 
dollars.
    In closing, I would like to make the following 
recommendations.
    First, this committee should conduct robust oversight 
hearings on the implementation of the UFLPA.
    Second, Congress should continue to increase funding for 
UFLPA enforcement.
    Third, this committee should examine the composition and 
role of the Commercial Customs Operations Advisory Committee, 
COAC, which heavily favors the importer community while 
excluding domestic producers and American workers.
    Fourth, Congress should pass robust and enforceable 
country-of-origin labeling rules.
    Fifth, Congress should pass new legislation modeled on the 
Foreign Corrupt Practices Act to address business complicity in 
state-imposed forced labor, human trafficking, war crimes, and 
other serious human rights atrocities.
    Sixth, Congress should amend the Securities Exchange Act of 
1934 to address the corrupt practices of foreign adversaries.
    Seventh, Congress should pass legislation prohibiting 
access to U.S. capital markets by malign foreign adversary 
companies that are under U.S. sanctions for human rights or 
national security reasons.
    Eighth, Congress should pass a TSP Fiduciary Security Act 
to update the fiduciary duty of the Federal Retirement Thrift 
Investment Board.
    Finally, Congress should pass the Turn OFF THE TAP Act to 
create a central ban on Federal funds going to foreign firms 
explicitly identified through U.S. Government blacklists.
    Thank you very much for the opportunity. I look forward to 
your questions.
    [The statement of Mr. Turkel follows:]
    [GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]	
    
    Chairman SMITH. Thank you, sir.
    Mr. Romano.

             STATEMENT OF JOHN ROMANO, CEO, TRONOX

    Mr. ROMANO. Good morning, Chairman, Ranking Member, and 
members. Today, I would like to discuss the negative impact of 
trade practices on the titanium dioxide industry.
    I serve as the co-CEO of Tronox Holdings, the world's 
leading vertically integrated producer of titanium dioxide, 
also known as TiO2.
    Our product is a base pigment that can be found in 
virtually all paints and coatings applications, such as 
architectural, industrial, automotive, aerospace, and military 
applications.
    It is also a key pigment that adds whiteness and opacity to 
many plastics products and is critical to nearly everything 
that is manufactured in this country.
    We operate the world's fifth-largest production facility of 
TiO2 in Hamilton, Mississippi, and in Oklahoma City we operate 
a world-class R&D center.
    As a vertically integrated producer, we mine titanium-
bearing ores at our five mines in South Africa and Australia, 
and we upgrade that ore to high-grade feedstock and ship it to 
our nine TiO2 facilities around the world.
    Our mines also produce valuable co-products, including the 
types of rare earth minerals that have been identified as 
critical minerals under Executive Order 13817 and 14017.
    Tronox is now considering using its existing mineral 
resources in South Africa and Australia as a feedstock for rare 
earth processing at a plant in Hamilton, Mississippi, to supply 
U.S.-based customers and potentially the U.S. Government.
    The threat from China is clear, both to our core TiO2 
business as well as any plans as we may have to move into the 
rare earth mineral space. While China accounted for 36 percent 
of the global TiO2 production a decade ago, today it accounts 
for 52 percent. And China's attempts to dominate the global 
supply of TiO2 are continuing to evolve.
    Based on our analysis of announced new plants, China's 
production could account for 70 percent of the global demand by 
2030, with growth in Chinese production far exceeding growth in 
global demand.
    At a recent conference, one of the largest Chinese 
producers of TiO2 predicted that its company's growth would 
result in the removal of Western capacity suppliers. In other 
words, we are seeing the classic Chinese playbook of creating 
enormous overcapacity to harm foreign competitors.
    The Chinese have also sought to appropriate U.S. TiO2 
technologies through criminal means. In 2014, a Federal jury in 
San Francisco found two individuals and one state-owned entity 
guilty of economic espionage and theft of TiO2 trade secrets.
    Many Chinese producers are either part or are wholly state 
owned, and there is discriminatory application of bankruptcy 
laws, which keeps failing firms propped up, preventing them 
from shutting down the unprofitable producers.
    In our African mining activities, we see a sharp contrast 
between Tronox and how the Chinese mine titanium-bearing ores. 
In South Africa, we employ approximately 2,200 individuals 
where we mine ore and we operate sophisticated mineral 
separation and smelting operations which produce high-quality 
titanium feedstock and pig iron, much of which is shipped to 
the United States.
    Our mine closure plans are world class, requiring the 
restoration of the local area's natural flora and fauna. 
China's exploitation of Africa's titanium mineral resources is 
far different.
    As China exhausts its own titanium resources, it has turned 
increasingly to Mozambique, where it exports huge quantities of 
unprocessed ore to China for mineral separation and upgrading.
    Not only are its mining practices far less sustainable than 
ours, but it lacks the in-country processing, which deprives 
local communities of employment and development opportunities.
    One of the primary reasons the United States TiO2 industry 
remains strong is attributable to decisive action taken by USTR 
under Section 301.
    Since the initiation of Section 301, U.S. TiO2 production 
has decreased by less than 10 percent and imports of Chinese 
material have halved, if you compare that in contrast to the 
European Union where capacity has been reduced by 22 percent 
and exports of Chinese material into the EU have increased 82 
percent.
    USTR's Section 301 action has enabled U.S. producers like 
Tronox to remain viable. This in turn has generated enormous 
benefits for the local communities where we operate, enabling 
Tronox to consider investments in adjacent industries like rare 
earth minerals.
    Tronox continues to invest heavily to remain competitive, 
but we are concerned that with a significant increase of 
Chinese TiO2 capacity current Section 301 tariffs may not be 
enough to prevent uneven playing fields in the U.S. markets.
    In closing, I would ask that as part of the 4-year review 
of actions under Section 301, USTR consider whether current 
tariff levels are sufficient to avoid injury to our industry.
    Thank you for your time.
    [The statement of Mr. Romano follows:]
    [GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]	
    
    Chairman SMITH. Thank you, sir.
    Mr. O'Shei.

  STATEMENT OF THOMAS O'SHEI, PRESIDENT STEELWORKERS LOCAL 135

    Mr. O'SHEI. Chairman Smith and Ranking Member Neal and all 
members of the committee, thank you for the opportunity to 
testify today.
    My name is Tom O'Shei, and I am the president of United 
Steelworkers Local 135L, which represents workers at the 
Sumitomo tire plant in Buffalo, New York.
    Our plant employs over 1,400 people, including 1,100 
members of the United Steelworkers. I have worked at the plant 
for 33 years now, mostly building tires.
    We build a wide range of tires, from motorcycle to 
passenger vehicle tires. We also export to Europe. We are 
looking to add tire capacity that will allow our location to 
build up to 17,500 tires per day.
    I can sit before you today talking about expansion and tell 
you that I recently posted on my Facebook page about job 
openings at the plant that start at $25.33 an hour with 
excellent benefits, not just because of our union contract, but 
also because the United Steelworkers fought against illegally 
dumped and subsidized imports.
    For the last 14 years, the union has used every tool in the 
toolbox to defend a domestic industry which has manufacturing 
facilities in 19 States and employs nearly 100,000 workers.
    Since the United Steelworkers has significant density in 
the tire industry, we are able to file trade cases without 
employers. Since many tire manufacturers in the U.S. are global 
manufacturers, there is a hesitancy in filing trade cases 
because of potential retaliation. But for the union, this is 
about our jobs and a level playing field.
    The union filed the only successful 421 petition against 
China in 2009, that lasted until 2012, on passenger vehicle and 
light truck tires.
    Then, in 2014, the union filed an anti-dumping and 
countervailing duty case because when the 421-relief expired, 
Chinese producers flooded the U.S. market with imports going 
from about 24 million units to more than 50 million.
    The reason for the gap between 2012 and our trade case 
filing in 2014 is because our trade laws require showing 3 
years of harm before we can win at the ITC.
    We won that PVLT tire case in 2015, which continues today. 
The union later won a trade case on bus and truck tires from 
China in 2017 and joined Titan Tire in winning trade cases for 
Off-the-Road tires as well. Finally, in 2021, the union won a 
follow-on case against four countries on PVLT tires.
    All told, there have been 12 cases that have led to duties 
on six different countries.
    Millions of dollars and thousands of hours have been spent 
defending American workers because we believe in fair trade. 
However, Congress could do more to ensure a level playing 
field.
    First, after 12 trade cases won against six countries, what 
more evidence does Congress need to see that tire products are 
an import-sensitive commodity? Congress should add tires to the 
GSP import sensitive list. We should not unilaterally drop 
tariffs on tires when, for example, a Chinese tire company 
invested nearly a billion dollars into a GSP country which 
could come here tariff free.
    We need to make it easier to address third country 
subsidies, like China's Belt and Road Initiative. We need to 
recognize that global companies can quickly shift dumping from 
one country to another, undermining U.S. manufacturing jobs. 
Congress could help this by passing bills like the Level the 
Playing Field Act 2.0 introduced last Congress by 
Representatives Terri Sewell and Bill Johnson.
    Second, workers negatively impacted by trade should have 
access to training programs like Trade Adjustment Assistance.
    Finally, we should not impose budget cuts on the agencies 
that enforce our trade laws. Unfortunately, recent House-passed 
legislation would decrease the budgets of agencies which 
enforce our trade laws by over $60 million. Millions of workers 
rely on our government to accurately review trade cases, and 
Federal budget cuts will lead to lost manufacturing jobs.
    My written testimony includes more examples of policy tools 
that could make American jobs more competitive in a global 
marketplace.
    Thank you for your time today, and I look forward to 
answering any questions you may have.
    [The statement of Mr. O'Shei follows:]
    [GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]	
    
    Chairman SMITH. I want to thank you all for your excellent 
testimony, and we will now proceed to the question-and-answer 
session, and I will begin first.
    Mr. Turkel, America has led the world by banning the import 
of products made with forced labor. I was proud to vote in 2015 
to update our forced labor import ban and again in 2021 to pass 
the Uyghur Forced Labor Prevention Act to address the 
unprecedented scale of the Chinese Communist Party's systematic 
use of forced labor. And, yet, there are credible reports of 
products made with forced labor still entering the United 
States.
    What more can we do through our trade policies to shine a 
light on China's human rights abuses and crack down on products 
manufactured from forced labor entering the U.S.?
    Mr. TURKEL. Mr. Chairman, thank you very much for the 
question.
    We can do a number of things to address that concern.
    First of all, we have to look into the country-of-origin 
concern. The law, the UFLPA, specifically focuses on the Uyghur 
region that is formally known as Xinjiang.
    But we do also know that there have been instances that the 
Chinese Government supported entities making the product 
without labeling and taking to the inland and then exporting to 
go another country and making it into the United States. That 
includes Mexico and Canada.
    So, we need to close the loophole, starting with addressing 
the country-of-origin concern, making a new rule.
    And then, two, we have to work with our partners and allies 
to encourage them to put in place a similar type of legislative 
mandate.
    And Europe is about to become a dumping ground for forced 
labor-purchased products. Italy, during the period of 2019 
through 2020, increased its import volume from Xinjiang almost 
by 200 percent.
    So, Europe needs to catch up. So do our Asian allies Japan, 
Australia.
    And then, finally, we have to continue to increase the 
enforcement mechanism in the United States with additional 
resources and tools. I know that Congress approved $70 million 
for enforcement. We have to continue to add funding so that our 
CBP colleagues can do their job.
    And, finally, I would look into the possibility of amending 
the UFLPA to make it applicable to the entire country of China. 
That one geographical area has been focused, but we may end up 
seeing human trafficking, internal migration.
    Chairman SMITH. Thank you.
    Mr. Romano, as you know, President Trump imposed tariffs on 
China because of its unfair trade practices under Section 301 
of the 1974 Trade Act. And President Biden has kept these 
tariffs in place so far, although his administration is 
currently conducting a 4-year review of the tariffs and may 
make changes as a result of that review.
    As a company that has had to deal directly with China's 
unfair trade practices, can you speak to the relationship 
between these tariffs and the protection of American production 
and jobs?
    Mr. ROMANO. Thank you, Chairman.
    Yes. So, I have been with the company that I am working for 
now for 35 years, and we have historically seen plants close 
due to Chinese imports.
    So, we had a plant in Savannah, Georgia, that closed in 
2004, and the other half of that plant closed in 2007, and it 
was directly related to Chinese imports for, I would say, a 
lower grade of TiO2 that was sold into the paper industry.
    We are not the only company that closed production. There 
was another facility in Delaware that closed for that.
    So how have the import of those 301 tariffs impacted us 
since then? There hasn't been any capacity actually eliminated 
since the trade barriers were put in place, the tariffs on 
TiO2, and it has actually allowed us to expand our facility in 
Hamilton, Mississippi.
    We have spent $135 million, a 15 percent increase in 
capital spend since those tariffs were put into place. We have 
a $15.5 million payroll at that facility with 450 employees, 
about 120 to 150 contractors working at that facility every day 
as well.
    So, it is not only helping us maintain our production 
globally, but it is also helping us maintain jobs. Many of our 
employees have been with the company for many years. It is 
generations.
    I said I have been with this company for 35 years. There 
has been somebody in my family that has worked for this company 
for 72 years.
    So, the U.S. is a big part of what we do. That Hamilton 
facility that we have in Mississippi is our crown jewel. And we 
are looking at opportunities now to try to see how we might be 
able to expand that business in the rare earth space and take 
some of the resources we have out of South Africa and Australia 
and bring them to the United States for upgrading.
    Chairman SMITH. Thank you, sir.
    Mr. Hemminger, trade enforcement is about making sure that 
our partners provide the access to markets that they were 
promised. Today, Canada is not meeting its obligations under 
USMCA as it relates to American dairy exports.
    If the U.S. fails to enforce obligations under our trade 
agreements on dairy products or any other, what does that mean 
for farmers such as yours or other businesses?
    Mr. HEMMINGER. We just simply aren't going to be able to 
continue to compete when it is a one-way street. We need a 
level playing field. And the American public and people need to 
realize that, generally speaking, we are either going to be 
importing all our fruits or vegetables or we are going to stand 
up for labor and equal opportunities for American farmers.
    Right today, like I said, we can't ship our milk to Canada. 
I expanded my dairy 30 years ago thinking that market would 
open up. Yet, at Hunts Point right here in New York City, in 
the Bronx, there is New York cabbage out of storage.
    My first attachment is the Hunts Point report from Friday, 
and on it, it shows a few products out of storage in Canada. 
You look at this again, July through November, every single 
product here will have a Canadian entry on it. At the same 
time, my milk can't go to Canada. It is just common sense.
    Chairman SMITH. Thank you, sir.
    Mr. O'Shei, one quick question.
    In your opening statement you made a comment about the 
Chinese investing in a company in a GSP nation. What is that 
country that you were referring to?
    Mr. O'SHEI. They are very clever in circumventing our trade 
laws. So, a question like that I have to think. And at this 
point Serbia is the GSP country.
    Chairman SMITH. Okay. Thank you very much.
    I recognize the ranking member, Mr. Neal, for questions.
    Mr. NEAL. Thank you for your informative testimony. The 
common theme is pretty clear: enforcement. I mean, everybody is 
nodding their heads in the affirmative as we say that.
    Mr. O'Shei, in your testimony you demonstrate the 
importance of enforcement of U.S. trade laws to protect 
domestic workers and manufacturers against many of these unfair 
practices of other countries; namely, China. We know that 
without effective enforcement, trade liberalization measures 
can have a detrimental effect on America's workers and 
industries.
    Could you talk briefly about how trade enforcement benefits 
workers like those that you represent at the tire manufacturing 
plant in Tonawanda, New York? And wouldn't the proposed budget 
cuts that you referenced be of great harm to trade enforcement?
    Mr. O'SHEI. Ranking Member Neal, thank you for the 
question.
    I believe they would. We could see before the 421 cases in 
2009 that there were tire plants closing every year in the 
United States. We could not compete with all the tires that 
were being illegally dumped in the United States. In 2013, when 
those expired, we started to feel it again.
    But once that second trade case went through and was 
properly enforced, rather than seeing tire plants shutting down 
across the United States, you see them being built again in the 
United States, employment going up, and offending countries 
actually building plants in the United States, employing 
American workers.
    So that is a big impact for us. But we also have seen where 
they would shift production to countries like Vietnam to avoid 
tariffs or export tires to other countries and try and send 
them to the United States tariff free.
    So, it is a constant shell game they are playing. And 
without the money for representatives to enforce our trade 
laws, they will start getting away with that again.
    Mr. NEAL. Thank you.
    And a follow-up, Mr. O'Shei. The Trade Adjustment 
Assistance Act for workers has provided workers adversely 
affected by trade with opportunities to gain new skills and 
credentials and the support needed to rebuild skills in future 
jobs.
    This is an ideal opportunity for community colleges across 
the country to address those who because of trade economics 
involved for dislocations an opportunity to get back into the 
workforce with upgraded skills.
    The program expired last year. We have been pushing very 
hard on this side for the Department of Labor to begin the 
process of putting together legislation that would come to the 
assistance of those who have been unfairly impacted.
    So, in the COMPETES Act, we were all in. We need to get our 
other side here to enjoy the same enthusiasm we do as it 
relates to trade adjustment assistance.
    Can you reference how that has worked in your area?
    Mr. O'SHEI. At our plant in 2010, we had a big layoff. 
Truck and bus tires were under a lot of duress from Chinese 
imports. We had a big layoff. The intent was to eventually shut 
the plant down because we were under so much pressure from 
those imports, and we didn't see a recovery coming.
    We filed. Our members received TAA. Eventually, through 
luck and hard work, we did return those workers to work after 
over a year of layoff. But during that year, they had received 
enhanced unemployment benefits, so they did not run out of 
unemployment, which gave them the opportunity.
    Many of our members had gone for welding certificates. We 
had some members who had their first year of a nursing degree. 
And you could see if we had not come back up without luck and 
hard work, people were on their way to being able to at least 
get decent employment after the plant would have closed.
    Mr. NEAL. Mr. Chairman, the trade component to American 
economic life once enjoyed great support. It is now severely 
diminished. And much of it is because of the dislocated 
workers, workforce across the country and some of the trade 
practices that international competitors offer.
    It is a really important part of our economic agenda. But 
you can see the constituency for it in America has considerably 
shrunk over the years, and I think that this is something 
through enforcement that we can hope to change.
    Chairman SMITH. Thank you, Ranking Member.
    I recognize the gentlelady, Ms. Malliotakis.
    Ms. MALLIOTAKIS. Thank you very much. Thank you all for 
your testimony. This hearing is critically important because we 
need to implement commonsense progrowth tax and trade policies 
that will boost our economy, the businesses, like those here 
today, and the American worker. I want to thank the 
International Longshoremen's Association for being present here 
and the work that they do at this port; the Steelworkers 
Worker's Union, thank you and your members, what they do; and, 
of course, our Port Authority Police, who are here to keep our 
ports safe.
    Let me start with Mr. Atkins, while many industries were 
eventually able to return to former habits post-pandemic, the 
seaports continued to grapple with altered consumer patterns 
and a shifting global supply crisis. How do seaports continue 
to adapt to these supply chain patterns that have emerged post-
pandemic?
    Mr. ATKINS. As everyone has noticed then on the way down to 
the site here that we are pretty wide open at our facility 
here. Our volume, year over year, is down about 42 percent at 
this facility. If you look at what our volume is now over 2019, 
we are down about 15 percent. So, what we are grappling with 
here is the consumer reaction post-pandemic. Once the pandemic 
hit and people were working from home, online purchasing went 
up dramatically. The shippers and the folks that owned the 
cargo that everybody goes online and buys flooded the shores 
with material that we saw here. That added to the congestion 
that we saw going through all the ports and all the facilities. 
Now that things have returned back to whatever this new normal 
is, a lot of the cargo owners that had rushed to ramping up 
their supplies are now working down that inventory. So, we see 
the decrease in numbers for, A, the inventory work-down that 
you see. And, right now, the interest rates on mortgages and 
that you see on any kind of consumer credit is impacting one of 
the biggest purchasing areas, and that is home goods. 
Furniture, by commodity, is the number one mover into the 
country. And, with interest rates as high as they are for 30-
year mortgages, people are not looking to trade in their 2 or 3 
percent mortgage into looking larger houses or build new 
houses. So, if you look at the furniture and home goods sector, 
that is down dramatically.
    Ms. MALLIOTAKIS. You mentioned some of the causes of this, 
say, freight recession.
    Mr. ATKINS. Right.
    Ms. MALLIOTAKIS. What are some of the policies that you 
would like to see implemented that would help get this economy 
back on track, maybe pausing the interest rates and better 
trade policies to export more to build our GDP? What would you 
say are some of the things that can help.
    Mr. ATKINS. Well, any of the beneficial moves that can be 
made to incentivize the export market will help not just the 
American worker but will help the ports that we see here today. 
And, overall, just the more--we are tied so tightly to 
consumerism, that a healthier economy is what brings that 
through. So, anything we can do to get more people employed 
through the trade policies or whether it is enforcement, 
anything that gets people to work, gets money into the economy 
system.
    Ms. MALLIOTAKIS. Great. How can we help streamline the 
process and ensure that American businesses and workers have a 
reliable system to prevent delays at the ports that hurt both 
exporters and the port's bottom line?
    Mr. ATKINS. Yeah. Well, actually, there are many 
stakeholders in the supply chain that have to help with that. 
It was the inland distribution that caused a lot of what we saw 
during the pandemic in the supply chain crisis: Warehouses were 
full. Distribution networks were full. So, we saw that cargo 
back up into the ports. So, anything--when you look at these 
large warehouse complexes, there just was not enough of them. 
And, talking to our friends in the warehouse industry, there 
are a lot of regions that it does take quite a bit of, I won't 
say legislation, but maneuvering through the local ordinances 
and county ordinances just to get more warehouses built to be 
able to get more cargo and velocity moving.
    Ms. MALLIOTAKIS. Well, thank you very much. The House 
Republicans have put forward some great ideas on how we can 
reignite our economy and get people back to work. Work 
requirements for some public benefits. If they are able-bodied, 
they can help stimulate the economy, work, produce. And I think 
that would help resolve some of your problems if we also do 
that in conjunction with smart pro-growth tax and trade policy, 
which we hope to work in a bipartisan manner. Thank you very 
much.
    Mr. ATKINS. Yes.
    Chairman SMITH. Thank you.
    Mr. Buchanan is recognized.
    Mr. BUCHANAN. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I want to thank all 
of our witnesses. I just know--I grew up as a blue-collar kid. 
I have been in business 30 years before I got here. We have got 
to come together. The time is now. And what I mean by now, I 
mean business and unions--my parents were union workers all 
their life--we have good-paying benefits here. I mean, we are 
talking about we were sharing 150,000 in terms of all in. That 
is great benefits. And we can have the governance come in and 
make a difference. So, I just want to say that I know we can. I 
have been to 80 countries in the world. I have done business 
abroad. We have got the best and most able people, but we need 
a shared vision. We need a shared plan, and we need to work 
together to make it happen and leave nobody behind. So, I just 
want to get that out of the way because I feel very strong 
about it.
    International trade, obviously, is critical. I will just 
say, I have got a seaport in Florida, Tampa Bay area. It is 
actually in Manatee County. We are up 35 percent. I am not 
saying because of one reason or another, but I was looking at 
the numbers, and we are up 35 percent.
    Ports in Florida, we have 15, and 1 in 5 jobs is trade-
related in terms of Florida. 107--you know what this number 
means better than I do--but 107 million tons of cargo was moved 
last year in Florida. And so that has come up, and I know some 
people get tired of hearing about Florida. I am from Detroit 
originally. But my point is, is that they are moving in the 
right direction. We are going to have a delegation meeting, 
Greg, and myself, and others, to meet with all our ports in the 
very near future. We are going to talk about, what more can we 
do? What more can we do to help? Because these are good-paying 
jobs, and it is very important.
    The other thing I just want to say in terms of FTAs, the 
free trade agreements, we need to find a way we can work 
together. USMCA, I felt was a good blueprint that we came 
together on. We had 380 votes. So, we have got to make sure 
that we are doing that. I think in terms of U.K., the EU, if 
you want to deal--it is just my opinion; I am not an expert--
but if you want to deal with China, you have got to work to 
find a way to work with the EU. That seems like we have a lot 
of shared values. They get good benefits, get the month of 
August off from work. So, they have got some really good 
positive things. We have got to find a way. If we can come 
together, I think that will make a big difference in terms of 
having an ally.
    Let me share this with you, is that a lot of people--you 
know it, but maybe you haven't thought about it--but I was on a 
trip this week, and someone brought up, we have got 8 billion 
people on the planet now. So, let's say the United States is 
350 million, but 8 billion, that is a lot of opportunity. And 
we have got to make sure we get our fair share. But we do, as 
someone mentioned, you know--a lot of them don't play the game 
right. We will talk about that in a minute--but USTA, Bob 
Lighthizer, and Richie knows, we worked together, and we got 
that. We got 380 votes out of there. We need to go to work and 
make some differences.
    The other thing I will just tell you--someone said about 
free trade--I am a free trader, but it needs to be fair. And I 
personally feel like we have been played. And I am a 
Republican. So let me just tell you that. I just feel strongly 
about that. Obviously, with China, we have been played for a 
lot of years. And I will say we got other good friends, even 
the Japanese--and I do business with the Japanese over the 
years--but we have been played there as well. At the end of the 
day, it needs to be somewhat fair. However you want to look at 
that. So that is just my strong feelings about that.
    I just got off yesterday, the plane at 4 o'clock on a 
CODEL, and we met with Korea, Indonesia, Jakarta, Poland, and 
north--one of the countries north--Moldova--so, anyway, we met 
with four or five different countries. And the bottom line is, 
is that all of them are very enthused about us. We need to be 
engaged. We need to be working together, and a lot of them were 
business groups that we met with--not all of them, but usually 
the receptions at night were business groups. And we had a lot 
of good dialogue, and they realized that they are--that our 
embassies were there. American businesspeople were there, and 
they are making some progress, but they need more help because 
what they do better, in a sense that way, it also helps us out 
as well.
    John, I wanted to mention, Mr. Atkins, a little bit, you 
said your business is down 42 percent. What is creating that 
because I really do want to better understand that? Is that the 
market? I don't think it is all the market. There are probably 
other factors, but I think we need to know what those other 
factors are so we could be helpful.
    Mr. ATKINS. It is partially driven by the trade lanes that 
you service at your individual terminal. The ones that we have 
here with Far East trade, with China being so far off with 
reduction in consumer purchasing here. It probably took or did 
take a more drastic hit than some of the other facilities that 
have more diversified services. Let's say Transatlantic or 
South America trade lanes. They tend to be more resilient 
because out of South America, you are bringing fruits, 
vegetables, food stuff, those type commodities. So, this 
facility that we are in today suffered more than probably the 
other ones in the harbor based on the services that it has.
    Mr. BUCHANAN. Well, as you have been asked, let's figure 
out how we can be helpful.
    Mr. ATKINS. Yes.
    Mr. BUCHANAN. Mr. Turkel, let me ask you, as it relates to 
intellectual properties, IP, 30 years ago, I was in Beijing 
with a group of businesspeople, and that was biggest issue back 
then. And I don't think it has got a lot better today with the 
Chinese in terms of intellectual properties. What are your 
thoughts about, how can we turn that around and get that where 
it makes more sense, or can we?
    Mr. TURKEL. Congressman, thank you for the question. I 
think we have to acknowledge something important, and our 
policymakers not being straightforward with American people 
that what we are dealing is a regime----
    Mr. BUCHANAN. Can you speak into the mike a little bit 
more.
    Mr. TURKEL. What we are dealing here is a regime that 
enslaves its own population; subsidizes key industries, making 
it impossible for American companies to compete fairly; and 
also steal our technology. This is one of their methods; been 
ongoing for a long, long time.
    So, I know it is a very complicated question, but this is 
something that I have been advocating that the United States 
Government that needs to go hard, tough in its dealing with the 
Chinese regime.
    Mr. BUCHANAN. Okay.
    Mr. Romano, let me ask you. You talked about minerals. I 
was just in Jakarta, Indonesia. I met with the President, 
myself, Members of Congress. They have got a lot of minerals, 
things that we need. People are very active and engaged there. 
Of course, the Chinese are at the front of the line, but we 
have got to find a way. They don't want to--they have got to do 
some business, like all those countries do, with the Chinese, 
but they don't trust them, don't want to work with them if they 
don't have to. But they have made it very clear, we need to be 
here. And, of course, when we go down looking down the road in 
terms of EV vehicles and everything else, they have a lot of 
those minerals there.
    What is your thought on what we need to be doing?
    Mr. ROMANO. Yeah, so we are a large miner. We have five 
mines in Australia and South Africa. So those minerals also 
contain rare earths. And historically what we have done with 
those rare earth minerals is ship them as tailings to China, 
and they have updated those into rare earth oxides and 
ultimately into magnets. So, we are now looking at exporting 
that material to the U.S., to our facility in Hamilton, 
Mississippi, so that we can actually----
    Chairman Smith. We are going to have--you are way over 
time.
    Mr. BUCHANAN. I didn't see the light there.
    Chairman SMITH. Thank you.
    Mr. Blumenauer.
    Mr. BLUMENAUER. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and for your 
patience and bringing us together. There is one area that I 
think this committee ought to be able to get their arms 
around--and I appreciate Mr. Turkel and Mr. O'Shei, talking 
specifically about the de minimis loophole.
    Mr. Turkel, you talk about how this is used to allow goods 
used by forced labor to come to the country--you have excellent 
testimony. You didn't have a chance to speak to it in just your 
5 minutes. But I would commend the committee to look at Mr. 
Turkel's page 10 and 11 about abuses here and the impact by 
allowing over 2 million packages a day--un-inspected, un-
tariffed--to flow into the United States.
    Mr. Turkel, do you want to talk about what you might have 
added if you had time for your testimony?
    Mr. TURKEL. Yes, I would like to point out that this is a 
serious problem. For example, one-half were shipped with zero 
digital data provided to U.S. Customs authorities.
    Mr. BLUMENAUER. Could you speak a little bit closer into 
the microphone. It is hard to hear you.
    Mr. TURKEL. Yes. One quarter of those flagged for 
inspection were never inspected because the importer failed to 
comply with the order to hold items for inspection. And then 
one quarter of those inspected--I am talking about de minimis, 
those 2 million packages coming through to the United States--
one quarter of those inspected at JFK airport had some type of 
violations. So, we need to look at why we have this loophole 
continued.
    One company that had been in the question is the Shein. 
That is fastest--that, what, the most successful Chinese 
company, even though their headquarter is in Singapore. The 
download of this app has surpassed already TikTok, Instagram, 
Twitter. So, this shows that this is one of the most effective 
tools that the Chinese entities is using by taking advantage of 
the de minimis rule.
    We need to consider looking at the possibility of changing 
the dollar amount. You mentioned--I mentioned 2 million, but 
yesterday I was looking at other records. One of the world's 
foremost experts on this issue, Dr. Laura Murphy testified in 
Congress. She said 3 million. So that is the daily package 
coming in into the United States. That is a big loophole that 
we need to close.
    Mr. BLUMENAUER. I appreciate that very much. I do hope that 
there is an opportunity for the committee to look at this huge 
volume of un-inspected. I mean, we are here in New York, the 
home of exploding electric bike batteries. There are $800--or 
excuse me, $799 E-bikes coming through under this loophole. And 
I just think it is a simple fix. It would be broadly supported 
on a bipartisan basis, and it is not just clothing.
    Mr. O'Shei, you mentioned the potential use of the de 
minimis loophole in your testimony about tires, the possibility 
perhaps of a company shipping tires direct to consumers four at 
a time?
    Mr. O'SHEI. Yeah, it only makes sense. They found every 
loophole they could to get around our trade laws and trade 
cases. And you could get a set of four tires shipped here less 
than $800 and put them on the road, and they wouldn't be 
following our Department of Transportation rules either. It is 
another way of cheating our trade laws, and it is dangerous.
    Mr. BLUMENAUER. Mr. Chairman, I will try and help you get 
back on schedule here. I am not going to deal with your 
patience. But I think this is something that the committee 
needs to look at. We see companies use what is called creative 
invoicing, that: If what the product you are getting actually 
costs $800 or more, let us work with you, and we will find a 
way to get that invoice under $800 for the un-inspected and un-
tariffed. These are dangerous. It undercuts American business. 
There are actions of forced labor that come through using this 
loophole. And I just urge the committee to look at the 
testimony from our two witnesses that zero in on the de minimis 
because I do think this is, you know--the legislation that I am 
going to reintroduce would only exclude a nonmarket economy 
that is on the watch list. And that is--let's see that is 
China. And I think they should actually be excluded. It is a 
small signal that we are not going to be overrun. But this 
loophole is swallowing the exception in ways that are really 
detrimental to American business and the safety of American 
consumers. Thank you for your patience, Mr. Chairman.
    Chairman SMITH. Thank you, Mr. Blumenauer. It appears that 
that loophole is almost a $800 free trade agreement for China 
for any products underneath that. That is what it looks like to 
me.
    Mr. Smith is recognized.
    Mr. SMITH of Nebraska. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    Thank you to all of our witnesses, certainly, for unique 
perspectives, but also expressing common concerns. And, as we 
sit here, it is a very relevant place that we would be here at 
a port as a Representative from Nebraska, the number one 
agriculture district in the U.S. House, trade is important. 
Getting products out of our country to other markets is 
important and to do so reliably. And the reverse of that too. 
We know it is important, whether it is fertilizer or other 
products, be it for agriculture specifically or our economy in 
general. So, we saw such difficulties during COVID that further 
complicated what was already a problem.
    Mr. Atkins, can you outline for us what you believe were 
the specific chokepoints here at GCT in moving goods during 
COVID and how you overcame them and then if you have any 
insight into ways that we might be able to alleviate them in 
the future.
    Mr. ATKINS. Sure. Thank you, Representative Smith. Where we 
saw the chokepoints were the long dwell times of the imports 
that were coming off the ship. There were a few reasons that 
that was created. Number one was some warehouses just did not 
have enough space to bring the containers out and put the cargo 
into the warehouse because they were full. Their parking lots 
were full with other imported containers. So, they tended to 
sit here and dwell at any of these facilities for longer than 
average period of time.
    There was also an issue with lack of chassis. Those are the 
sets of wheels that detach from the container and actually 
move. Where were all the chassis? They were tied up in the 
parking lots of all the shippers with loads on them that they 
could not unload them and get the empties back in time to 
return the empty and pick up the next one.
    So, it was a chassis issue. It was a space constraint 
issue. And it really just backed up the pipeline into the ports 
and went beyond that to the point that, for most of 2022, the 
Port of New York had on average about 15 to 17 ships at 
anchorage waiting to come in, and they could not come in and 
discharge the goods because there were no room at the 
facilities.
    So now you see driving down here today time has somewhat 
resolved that issue. You see not enough cargo coming in. There 
is plenty of space now. There is plenty of chassis that are 
available. So, it was working down inventories that has helped 
that. And also, the purchasing volume has just gone down over 
the pandemic time period.
    Mr. SMITH of Nebraska. Thank you.
    Mr. Romano, you have spoken about the vertical integration 
at Tronox and the importance of raw materials in Africa and 
Australia. Can you tell us about what you have seen regarding--
further tell us what you have seen regarding the Chinese 
attempts to aggressively secure the raw material resources 
globally so that they can control and exploit those?
    Mr. ROMANO. Thank you for the question. So, yes, 
historically you would have--so Australia--I mentioned we are a 
big miner in Australia. And you get a lot of junior miners in 
Australia that have historically not only mined but they have 
upgraded that raw material. What you are seeing now is a lot of 
these junior miners are getting interest from the Chinese. So, 
they buy into these companies, get board seats, and, in many 
instances, they are getting a hundred percent right--offtake 
rights to material.
    So, I mentioned Mozambique is another good example where 
they are running out of titanium in China in the minerals that 
they mine. So, in Mozambique, they go in there; they buy the 
mining rights. They are taking the raw material in a form of 
what is called heavy mineral concentrate. It is not upgraded. 
Then they ship everything back to China to be upgraded and 
processed.
    For us as a miner, we have very strict rules on how we 
actually have to take the mining work that we do and then put 
the property that we mine on back to its normal--the way it 
came, the natural flora and fauna. You know, that is a 
significant disadvantage that we have; an advantage they have 
because of the unfair practice that they are using by going and 
exploiting other countries to get raw materials to send back to 
China.
    Mr. SMITH of Nebraska. Okay. Mr. Hemminger, just briefly in 
the interest of time, can you perhaps reflect on the need for 
enforceable trade agreements and maybe touching upon USMCA in 
addressing Canada's dairy tariff rate quota system?
    Mr. HEMMINGER. It seems like ``close the loophole'' seems 
to be the common theme here today. That is certainly the case 
there, I think. In my attachment no. 3 with my testimony, the 
CEO of our milk co-op, Upstate Niagara Co-op, articulately 
explains the issues here. It is really confounding that, for 30 
years, this has gone on. I have thought numerous times this was 
going to be enforced the next 2 or 3 years, but somehow, they 
cleverly keep figuring out a way to not live up to their side 
of the agreement.
    Mr. SMITH of Nebraska. Well said. Thank you.
    I yield back.
    Chairman SMITH. Mr. Steube is recognized.
    Mr. STEUBE. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    Mr. Hemminger, we will stay with you. Thank you for your 
testimony today. And I agree with you that the American farmers 
are losing a competitive edge in the global marketplace. It 
seems like there are two parts to this problem. First, other 
countries are stacking the deck against American imports, 
whether that is Mexico banning certain GMO crops or Canadian 
subsidies to undercut American farmers. Or perhaps, more 
importantly, our government isn't doing enough to help American 
businesses, farmers in particular. We are imposing ridiculous 
regulatory burdens on labor, environmental standards, a laundry 
list of other areas. We have created a policy towards farmers 
that is definitely not America first.
    In your testimony, you said money goes where money can be 
made. With that in mind, do you have any further examples or 
predictions going forward of how States like New York or 
America in general are losing agriculture production and 
resources to competitors because of bad policy.
    Mr. HEMMINGER. Well, thank you for the question, and I am 
very concerned. We are just stacking the deck against the 
American farmer, particularly those that have more intense 
labor needs with the fruits and vegetables and dairy. I believe 
that, in New York State, where we are a little more traditional 
with family farms that would have a handful of employees or 
maybe even 10 or 15, that the regulations they are looking at, 
that they are going to get pushed out of business. I am scared 
for them. I have a little more mechanized, but as I have 
learned in the process of the vegetable business when I was a 
major shipper for Birds Eye Foods, being the last guy standing 
doesn't make you very smart; everybody else moved on first. 
And, fortunately, I stayed in the dairy business, and that is 
my primary business today, along with the cabbage.
    But we have to do something to stay competitive. I mean, 
there is talk about E-Verify system in Washington right now. 
Folks, 70 or 80 percent of the employees on dairy farms in the 
United States will struggle with an E-Verify system; the 
hospitality business and food businesses in a lot of our big 
cities. This didn't happen overnight. It has evolved over the 
last 30 years. And we need to listen to small business and hear 
them and understand that we need a comprehensive immigration 
bill that addresses this. Some of the finest families in my 
community or my employees with me for 20 years that I am not 
sure that they can live up to an E-Verify system. And it is a 
very, very big concern.
    As far as GMO and whatnot, I mean, it is just a playing 
card by Mexico right now. There is absolutely no validity at 
all in any of their concerns about GMO. Sound science is how we 
are put together doing our cropping whatnot with as minimal a 
carbon footprint as possible with a lot of cover crops is what 
we are about. And, with that, we need modern farming practices.
    Mr. STEUBE. Yeah, I have seen that in my own district in 
Florida. We have seen it after NAFTA was passed. We have lost 
tomato growers because they can obviously produce it a lot 
cheaper without the labor standards, without the environmental 
standards in Mexico than they can here in the United States.
    In general, American farmers and businesses follow the 
rules. If something is prohibited, they don't do it. But, in 
Mexico or in China, rules and bans are more of suggestions. 
When something is banned in Mexico or China, it often just 
means someone needs to be bribed; businesses don't really play 
by the rules. This is also true for environmental and human 
rights regulations as well.
    Mr. Romano and Mr. Hemminger, if you want to touch on it 
too. Can you speak to the unlevel playing field created when 
countries like Mexico and China implement rules that are 
followed by American businesses but aren't actually enforced or 
followed by their own businesses.
    Mr. Romano.
    Mr. ROMANO. Yeah, so I think it is a great question when 
you think about how we are producing in the United States. 
Specifically, we actually have a plant in China as well. So, 
when we think about how we bought that plant back in 2019 in 
part of another acquisition, and that is a small facility that 
we struggle to compete with because, when we--using our 
technology and our resources the way we need to invest in the 
U.S., we use those same principles in China. And we find that 
we are very uncompetitive because of the things that we are 
doing as we manage our production to ensure that we are 
treating the environment the appropriate way.
    Mr. STEUBE. Well, and you spoke about the need to consider 
increased tariffs on China in regards to the titanium dioxide. 
Can you speak further as to why, and when dealing with 
unscrupulous trading partners such as China, a simple free 
market approach doesn't always work and economic tools such as 
tariffs are necessary?
    Mr. ROMANO. Yes, so I mentioned that, as the tariffs have 
been put in place, exports into the U.S. have halved. I will 
give you another example of another country where we supply a 
lot of material into is India. So, in that same timeframe, 
India has a market that consumes about 400,000 tons a year. 
Imports in 2017 were 89,000 tons. They are now 210,000 tons.
    So, the import duties that have been put in place, along 
with the 301, have helped us manage our business, and we 
struggle to do that in Europe as well. So, Europe is another 
country that we have got three production facilities in, and 
the Chinese imports in that area have gone up to 82 percent 
since 2017.
    Mr. STEUBE. Thank you. My time has expired.
    Chairman SMITH. Thank you. Mr. Pascrell.
    Mr. PASCRELL. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    Mr. O'Shei, I want to start off with a couple of quick 
questions, if you will. Should Congress make it easier for 
unions to file trade petitions by lowering minimum percentage 
thresholds for a union to show interest in anti-dumping and 
countervailing duty cases?
    Mr. O'SHEI. I agree with that statement. Thank you for the 
question, Mr. Pascrell. For the most part, especially in our 
industry, most of the major tire manufacturers in the United 
States have plants in China. And they don't want to get 
anywhere near a trade case that we bring to the International 
Trade Commission because they all fear repercussion. And, you 
know, talking to our legislative representatives, they are not 
inexpensive cases to bring. When we go before the ITC, China 
has the best lawyers money can buy. They are very hard to 
prove. They don't give up the information easy.
    I believe our most expensive case might have been Truck and 
Bus. It was $3 million to bring. They don't get that type of 
dues money from all the union rubber workers in the U.S. 
combined in a year.
    Mr. Pascrell, my second question is trade cases cost a lot 
of time, a lot of money. If you want to file, that is what you 
have to look forward to. How should the Federal Government 
support easing this complicated process for smaller companies 
and unions? Just quickly give me an idea of what you see 
ahead--you would like to see ahead.
    Mr. O'SHEI. What we would like to see is, number one, a way 
where you don't have to show 3 years of injury before you bring 
a case because usually, by that time, you may be so damaged you 
never recover. Also, you know, it would be nice to see maybe 
even if the government could bring cases for us, or 
representatives, or, you know, smaller companies not having the 
money to bring a case have some sort of advocacy there for 
them. But, you know, we actually had one case where a major 
tire company testified against us because they made--tire 
overseas.
    Mr. PASCRELL. Thank you for your brief response. We need to 
talk a lot more about that. Because I think something can be 
done in this area for everybody's health.
    And welcome to everybody.
    The witnesses were excellent, Mr. Chairman. If you look 
back at their records, and they have done about everything.
    And I don't know how long you lasted in this business, Mr. 
Atkins, 30 years, but it is not bad. Congratulations.
    Mr. ATKINS. Thank you.
    Mr. PASCRELL. Working with both business and labor is not 
an easy task, but one worthwhile for the economy, I believe. 
And nearly 40 percent of the Nation's population live in the 
tri-state area. So welcome.
    Having a field hearing here at the busy port in New York 
and New Jersey is definitely welcome. We are just a golf shot 
from the Garden State. I am right happy to show the committee 
more real folks living in Patterson, New Jersey, my hometown.
    The operations at Global Container Terminals underscore the 
vital role the Federal Government plays in a vibrant economy. 
The Federal Government worked with the Port Authority on a $1.8 
billion dredging project here. This project ensured the 
terminals would welcome big ships with speed and efficiency. 
That was the promise. Strong Federal partnership with the Army 
Corps dredged our region's harbor 50 feet. Correct me if I am 
wrong. It helped us maintain our leading global shipping 
destination, but the Army Corps was a valuable agency to what 
you were trying to do with this port. But, considering their 
budget plan, the other side I respect deeply, but it doesn't 
make sense. Because we have to agree, in order to do what we 
promised, which we did not do.
    Just 13 days ago, we passed a terrible plan that hacks 
Federal spending by at least 22 percent. This would be the 
biggest cut to nondefense programs in our history. Republicans 
are following the footsteps of their disgraced and indicted 
leader. Mr. Trump tried to chop 16 percent, a billion dollars, 
from the Army Corps' budget. Those are the facts.
    So, the budget would gut the Department of Homeland 
Security. It could devastate our economic future and trade 
enforcement. So, it is one thing to talk about it; it is 
another thing to put the money where your mouth is and do it, 
if it is meaningful.
    Rolling back funding would slash Customs' frontline 
enforcement by 2,400 agents. It sounds like the IRS 10 years 
ago. These cuts would cripple our forced labor enforcement.
    Talk is cheap. I don't have to tell you, Mr. Atkins. So, it 
is going to undo our work if we pass this budget.
    I am a long-time champion of strong trade enforcement, but 
it is not free. I have longed pushed for more funding for 
Customs' trade office. Cuts of the magnitude my colleagues have 
proposed are devastating and reckless. Let's be very honest 
about these cuts, especially since we see the importance of 
Federal investments right here today in Staten Island, USA.
    Thank you all for being here. The testimony was excellent. 
I am going back to Washington in a few minutes to fight the 
fight.
    Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    Chairman SMITH. Thank you, sir.
    Mrs. Fischbach is recognized.
    Mrs. FISCHBACH. There we go. I had to figure out the 
technology.
    But, first of all, I want to thank you all for being here 
because I think the field hearings are one of my favorite 
things because we get to hear from folks across the country; 
you know, Georgia and Oklahoma and West Virginia. And so, I 
appreciate it that we get out of D.C. for a variety of reasons. 
But one of them in particular is being able to talk to folks 
that what we do in D.C. actually affects.
    And, Mr. Hemminger, I just wanted to talk a little bit 
about--I am from Minnesota, heavy ag district. I have about 100 
miles of Canadian border on the northern part of my district. 
And I know that Mr. Smith had mentioned USMCA. Very concerned 
about--excuse me, the dairy enforcement now. We have got the 
issue with the GMO corn from Mexico. So very concerned that we 
actually do the enforcement that we are supposed to on that. 
And then Mr. Steube had mentioned about the competition.
    I was wondering if you could talk maybe a little bit about 
the workforce issues. You mentioned and I think briefly in your 
opening statements, you mentioned the H-2A; I think you 
mentioned E-verify, you know, in responding to one of the 
questions.
    Workforce is a huge issue and particularly for the ag 
industry. So, I am wondering if you have any ideas, what can we 
do? Is there an answer through visas, immigration policy? What 
can we do that would make sense to open up that workforce 
shortage.
    Mr. HEMMINGER. Thank you. An excellent question. First of 
all, we need a comprehensive immigration program that we have 
kicked down the road for over 15 years. And, with that, we have 
to have a system that at least gives a green card to these 
people that are here and have been working hard. We had a 
reasonable bill in front of the Congress here 6 months ago or 
so, and it failed again. That is a where we need to start.
    The H-2A program, I have participated for 15 years. 
Unbelievably bureaucratic. We got it a little bit simplified 
and some things coming along to make it a little more workable. 
And then, in the last 2 years, it has gone just the opposite 
way.
    Their formula to figure out the wages is absolutely 
bizarre. We are priced now so that, when I pay overtime on a 
$16.95 an hour in my greenhouses and cabbage operation, I am 
double my competitors' in Canada salary. Double. They don't 
have to pay overtime. And their foreign visa program is more in 
the $11 to $12 program.
    And keep in mind, on top of that, we pay--we have brand new 
housing for the people when they are here. We supply them with 
all their transportation, including to and from the store. And 
then part of the program is we pay all their transportation to 
and from Mexico.
    In Mexico, what they make in an hour here is a day's wage 
there. And these people are wonderful. I have a few guys--I was 
only getting a handful 15 years ago--I have a number of them 
that are still with me. I have more than half my crew that have 
been with me around 10 years. And they are family to us now. 
And they come, and our farm runs well.
    We need to embrace that program. It needs to be allowed to 
be more than just seasonal. Right now, it is seasonal only. The 
dairies need an opportunity to be a part of that program to 
bring people here for multiple years. The training and 
technology on our farms today takes people that need to be 
trained, and it could take 6 months to train them. We are 
literally crippling our industry and making our industry have 
to seek these undocumented workers. It is just so frustrating.
    And enforce the trade agreements. And I have a very, very 
soft heart for the people that are being misused in other parts 
of the country. I am glad that we heard that testimony today. 
And I believe with trade we could help fix that as well.
    We need to support the American farmer, or we are only 
going to be growing corn, soybeans, and wheat here. And nothing 
against my friend from Kansas, but if we want crops that take 
labor, we have got to fix this. Otherwise, we are going to 
slowly just watch labor-dependent agriculture dwindle here in 
the United States. And it would be foolish for us to continue 
to spend money on these enterprises if we are going to be axing 
them.
    Mrs. FISCHBACH. And thank you very much, and I appreciate 
that. It was very well said. And we will continue to pursue 
what we can to make sure we get that workforce shortage dealt 
with.
    And I just want to say, I apologize; I have to leave early. 
I have to get back to D.C. for another committee hearing. But 
thank you again, all, for being here.
    And, with that, I yield back 2 seconds.
    Chairman SMITH. Thank you.
    Mr. Estes is recognized.
    Ms. ESTES. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    And thank you to all our witnesses today for being here. I 
appreciate having field hearings outside of the D.C. Beltway to 
hear firsthand, really, how our policies that are made in 
Washington affect families and businesses. And I think today is 
really useful as we talk about trade here, particularly in the 
hub of global commerce.
    There is strong bipartisan support for some of the trade 
themes we have talked about today: expanding markets for our 
manufacturers and producers, continuing the good work we 
started with USMCA, enforcing our existing agreements, and 
holding China accountable.
    I briefly want to touch on a nonpartisan commonsense bill 
that I believe will help us in a competitive--on the global 
stage and enhance our ability here at home to innovate and 
expand trade opportunities. The bill restores the immediate R&D 
expensing for American innovators and entrepreneurs, the 
American Innovation and R&D Competitiveness Act. I was joined 
with my Ways and Means colleague on the other side of the 
aisle, Congressman John Larson, and many others on this 
committee.
    According to the R&D Coalition, the U.S. share of global 
R&D investments in 2019 was 30 percent, which is down from 33 
percent in 2009 and 40 percent in 1999. On the other hand, 
China, heard their global shares of R&D expense has gone up. It 
was 24 percent in 2019, a big jump from 5 percent in 2000. And 
15 percent in 2009. That means that China's R&D expenses have 
grown by 400 percent in just two decades.
    By disincentivizing R&D here at home, American tax policies 
encourage manufacturers and production to move abroad. And we 
know where R&D occurs is critical for job manufacturing, job 
growth, and having jobs period that then allow us to export 
American-made products.
    Mr. Romano, the National Taxpayers Union called this bill a 
no-brainer and thinks that, given its broad bipartisan support 
and real-world application, it should pass with ease. Do you 
agree with this is a no-brainer? And what would you say to my 
colleagues to help encourage them to support legislation like 
this?
    Mr. ROMANO. I would absolutely say that I would agree with 
that. From the standpoint of research and development, you 
think about what we do. We are a miner. And we upgrade the 
products that ultimately we sell as finished goods to people 
like you. Our product is a quality-of-life product. And the 
only way we are going to stay ahead of the Chinese is through 
investment and technology; technology for the products that we 
make, the way we make them, and obviously reinvesting in 
technology and supporting growth with our own employees so that 
they have the technology and the skills that are required to--
as we upgrade our facilities, they have got the capability to 
run those facilities with new techniques.
    Mr. ESTES. Well, thank you. And, you know, I mentioned, 
talked a little bit about China and their R&D investments. We 
also know that China has been involved in predatory trade 
practices and participates in atrocious human rights abuses. At 
the same time, they have used their Belt and Road Initiative to 
deepen ties with other countries while United States has taken 
a backseat to some of these practices, including expanding 
trade. This is deeply disturbing and has a detrimental impact 
to U.S. workers and small businesses.
    From a human rights and economic standpoint, Mr. Turkel, 
what is your assessment of China's aggressive approach to 
trade, and what should the U.S. be doing to counter the Chinese 
Communist Party and these practices?
    Mr. TURKEL. Thank you very much for the question. The BRI 
that you mentioned also has something to do with the ongoing 
genocide and the enslavement of the Uyghur people. When you 
look at the--at least in the last 10 years of Chinese economic 
growth, it has been slowed because they claim that they got 
millions of people out of poverty, but at the same time, they 
created a vacuum, a labor shortage, which still is the case. 
And they tried to resolve that issue by using the Uyghurs as a 
modern-day slave. That is one.
    And the other is a political reason. As I alluded earlier, 
it is about total control.
    So, one of the things that we have to do in order to 
address this is to look at the ways in which that we cannot 
only enforce, fully enforce, the existing laws but also looking 
at new laws. One of the new laws that I think would be very 
helpful is the modeling the FCPA, Foreign Corrupt Practices 
Act, to make human rights abuses, enslavement of the Uyghurs, 
atrocity crimes, a law enforcement matter, attaching it to the 
existing law that we are discussing today.
    The other thing is that we need to implement Uyghur Human 
Rights Policy Act that specifically mandates the administration 
to continue to sanction Chinese entities. And the UFLPA also 
requires Entity List designations. Since last June, there were 
only 20 companies that have been designated. We need to expand 
that. There are 55,000 entities doing business in the Uyghur 
region. We don't have to designate all of them at the entity 
list, but the vast majority of them, including this one here 
that I am showing this amazing report produced by my colleagues 
at the Uyghur Human Rights Project, reporting the dates, the 
red dates coming to the United States that are produced, 
exported by Xinjiang Production Construction Corps, which is 
recognized by the United States Government as a paramilitary 
and also sanctioned under the Global Magnitsky Act. I would 
like to ask chairman for your permission to include this in the 
record.
    Chairman SMITH. Without objection.
    [The information follows:]
   [GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]	
    
    Mr. ESTES. Thank you. There are so many issues to talk 
about. I would love to talk about some agriculture issues from 
Kansas with New York, but, unfortunately, I am out of time.
    Mr. Chairman, I yield back.
    Chairman SMITH. Thank you. I would like to recognize the 
gentlelady from West Virginia, Mrs. Miller.
    Mrs. MILLER. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and Ranking Member 
Neal.
    And I want to thank all of you who are here today. What a 
gorgeous day. I, along with my chairman, probably wish that I 
was wearing the Panama hat that I received in Ecuador when we 
were down on a trade trip with many of our neighbors and allies 
talking trade.
    I want to thank each one of you personally: Mr. Atkins, Mr. 
Hemminger--I am a fellow farm girl member--Mr. Turkel, all of 
you--Mr. Romano, Mr. O'Shei, which we would say O'Shay in West 
Virginia, so I am sure you get that a lot.
    I am from a beautiful State full of incredible natural 
resources and in particular water and these rivers that all 
flow down to the Ohio River. And Huntington, where I live, is 
either the first or second largest inland water way port. It 
depends on what Cincinnati has to say about that. But we move 
different things than you move right here in these ports.
    Mr. Romano, I understand that your company is considering 
building a rare earth plant in Mississippi. And my home State 
of West Virginia, of course, has received similar interest in 
developing these capabilities and bringing in an essential part 
of the supply chain to the United States.
    I am greatly concerned about China's dominance--we keep 
hearing this through this entire discussion today--and their 
dominance in the critical mineral market because the United 
States absolutely has the capabilities to promote our own 
domestic industry. And for too long the Federal Government has 
gotten in the way. So, we are working to be able to change 
that.
    Can you discuss what challenges your company has faced when 
deciding whether to develop critical mineral processing plants 
right here in the United States? And do you have any 
suggestions for Congress to ensure that the U.S. processing 
plants can be competitive in the current market?
    Mr. ROMANO. Thank you for your question. So, as I mentioned 
in my testimony--or maybe I did it in a question--we have--
Monazite is a product that we mine at the same time that we 
mine titanium in South Africa and Australia. So historically 
what we have done with that, it was a waste stream that was 
being processed and sold to China. So, over the course of the 
last several years, we have turned that into a revenue stream. 
But now we are looking at how we can step down the value chain 
and actually build a facility in Hamilton and upgrade that 
product similar to the way we upgrade titanium dioxide.
    So, there is a lot of money when you think involved in 
that. It is a capital expense. So, I use a different raw 
material, cobalt. You think about there is a company not long 
ago that just tried to build a mine there without any trade 
barriers. The mine came up and running, and what did China do? 
They dropped the price for cobalt. So, they have the same 
capability to do that in rare earth applications. And that is 
why China owns dominantly over 90 percent of that.
    So, I think we have got to--we are uniquely positioned as a 
miner and also an upgrader of raw materials to look at Hamilton 
as a facility. We believe that is a great location for us to 
expand our footprint, support the local employment of that 
area, and also be able to develop products that will be used 
here in America, and possibly even by the U.S. Government. 
Monazite is the product that we would be selling into that--for 
rare earth oxides, and it is used in military applications for 
F-15s. You think about--every electronic device inside one of 
those F-15s has a motor in it. Those motors have rare earths in 
them. So, it is also wind turbines and electric vehicles. So, 
we are looking to see how we can partner with companies in the 
U.S. to make sure that we have not only a viable plan but one 
that is economical for us long term.
    Mrs. MILLER. One of the things I thought in office is that 
I wish I had a degree in chemistry, particularly because of the 
natural resources. And I think about all the byproducts left 
over from coal throughout the years. But I will switch 
direction with you a little bit to talk about how President 
Trump's section 301 tariffs against China could have helped 
your company remain as a viable competitor. I believe it is 
essential that we deliberate with our tariffs in a strategic, 
as well as providing potential relief for nonstrategic goods 
that are important to U.S. businesses. Can you talk about 
conditions for U.S. titanium dioxide producers before tariffs 
were imposed?
    Mr. ROMANO. Yeah. So, again, I have been with this company 
for many years, and I have seen many plants close over time. 
So, we had production in Savannah, Georgia, where we made a 
titanium product that was specific to the paper industry. And I 
can remember having meetings with customers at that time 
telling them that we didn't choose to be competitive because 
the Chinese were bringing that material in at half our costs. 
Ultimately, that plant ended up closing. So, when we think 
about, okay, now fast forward to 2017 when the tariffs were put 
in place; there has been no plant closures.
    Capacity has idled a bit, slowed down a bit just due to 
supply and demand. But capacity as nameplate has not changed. 
You think about the imports of TiO2 into the U.S. versus our--
the consumption of TiO2 in the U.S. versus production, we 
consume as a country about a million tons a year of titanium 
dioxide, and we have a capacity utilization of 1.5 million. So, 
there is really no need to have that much material coming in. 
Those tariffs have been extremely helpful for us.
    Mrs. MILLER. That is great.
    Mr. Atkins, thank you for hosting us here today. I have 
traveled extensively since becoming a Member of Congress, and I 
was thrilled to go to the Port of Singapore last year. As the 
operator of the second largest port in America, I would be very 
interested in hearing how you think U.S. ports compare to 
others globally and what role Congress plays in maintaining 
your competitiveness?
    Mr. ATKINS. Yes, ma'am. Thank you for the question. The 
U.S. side, it is a good blend of the equipment that we utilize 
and how we work with the workforce. Over in Singapore and a lot 
of the other ports around the world, they tend to be 
transshipment hubs, highly mechanized, highly automated. 
Automation doesn't necessarily mean that it is going to be 
faster. It just means that it is consistent.
    We have an operation over in Bayonne that does have a 
degree of remote operation. We kept people in particular jobs 
in equipment that actually performs faster than some of these 
automated operations. So there needs to be continued investment 
across the board, as we talked about, on dredging, on the 
equipment that we have. I know there is a Buy America piece 
when it comes to these large gantry cranes that we talk about. 
There are just no manufacturers when it comes to any of these 
large cranes that you see. And these cranes on average are $15- 
to $18 million apiece. So, it is heavy, heavy investment. It is 
not responsible for any type of Federal grants or subsidies. So 
those are the type things that we can look to stay competitive 
with other ports around the world. But it is a good blend of 
the investment that you have on your infrastructure and the 
labor that you have on your facility.
    Mrs. MILLER. You answered my next question very well.
    Thank you so much, and I yield back.
    Chairman SMITH. Thank you. Representative Kustoff.
    Mr. KUSTOFF. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Nice hat.
    Thank you to the witnesses for appearing today.
    Thank you, Atkins, for hosting us.
    I want to go to you, and you talked about this in your 
testimony and in response to the questions, but maybe if I can 
go a little bit deeper. The volume here today is less and maybe 
substantially less than it was a year ago. Is that a fair 
statement?
    Mr. ATKINS. Yes.
    Mr. KUSTOFF. And I think you gave these numbers, but can 
you give the numbers of today versus a year ago and maybe at 
the start of the pandemic?
    Mr. ATKINS. So, our numbers today, year over year, going 
back exactly 12 months, were approximately 42 percent down now 
as from where we were last year.
    Mr. KUSTOFF. Give that number again, I am sorry.
    Mr. ATKINS. 42 percent. If you took our numbers that we 
have today and go back to 2019, as we classify as pre-pandemic, 
we are down about 15 percent year over year.
    Mr. KUSTOFF. And how would you characterize the supply 
chain issues today as compared to a year ago?
    Mr. ATKINS. I think, as I phrased it earlier, the time kind 
of dissipated the supply chain issues. What we were 
experiencing last year was a large glut of cargo that all was 
getting pushed out at once where everything--there was no place 
to put it.
    Now that trade has slowed down and, you know, the inventory 
levels that we saw during the pandemic have come down, that has 
greatly eased, if not eliminated, the supply chain issues that 
we saw a year ago.
    Mr. KUSTOFF. To be fair about it, it is more of a demand 
issue than it is a supply chain issue.
    Mr. ATKINS. Correct.
    Mr. KUSTOFF. You have been in this business 30 years, you 
have seen up and down cycles. How would you characterize this 
cycle where we are now? Or are we in a cycle.
    Mr. O'SHEI. This is a very cyclical business. When interest 
rates are up, consumer purchasing goes down. When in 2008 and 
2009, during the financial crisis, trade came pretty much to a 
grinding halt. So, we appear to be in self-correction period, I 
think you could call it, where we are--you know, the shippers 
and cargo owners that you see across the board are working down 
their inventory levels. Once they get to a certain point, you 
will start to see a replenishment, and you should see volumes 
then coming back.
    Mr. KUSTOFF. Okay. Where we are today, not a true 
definition, but would you characterize this as a--is it 
softening, or are we in a recession now?
    Mr. ATKINS. Oh, math and economics was never my strong suit 
in college. But, from where we sit, you still see buying going 
on. We do employ outside economists to help us try to read the 
tea leaves. And you still see purchasing go on. It is just 
working the inventory levels down. So, I wouldn't call it 
necessarily a recession.
    Mr. KUSTOFF. When you forecast out, say, 90 days, how does 
this seaport look then compared to now?
    Mr. ATKINS. From the larger shippers that we talk to, and 
cargo owners, they are saying third quarter you should start to 
see a bounce back.
    But, historically, you start in June, inventory or volumes 
start to pick up, getting ready for back-to-school goods, 
starting to replenish warehouses for Christmas shopping, so 
forth and so on.
    So, a combination of the usual annual cycle that you see, 
on top of inventories starting to need to be replenished, 
should be around third quarter.
    Mr. KUSTOFF. I think one example you gave was furniture and 
lack of demand.
    Mr. ATKINS. Yes.
    Mr. KUSTOFF. And I think you characterized the rising 
interest rates. So, if you expand that out, if interest rates 
stay elevated compared to where they were, the demand for 
furniture may not be what it was a couple years ago.
    Would that be a fair statement?
    Mr. ATKINS. That is a very fair statement.
    Mr. KUSTOFF. If I can just in my remaining time, in your 
opening statement and in your written statement you talked 
about the media reporting in 2002 on the supply chain, blaming 
it on carriers, and that that was misplaced.
    Mr. ATKINS. Yes.
    Mr. KUSTOFF. What were the reasons?
    Mr. ATKINS. The reasons were an oversupply of the material 
that was coming in, that there was no place left to go.
    I mean, an ocean carrier does not make money with their 
vessel while it is sitting anchored for 2 weeks waiting to get 
into harbor. So, they have a vested interest to get in, get the 
ship discharged and out.
    But marine terminals, whether it is East Coast or West 
Coast, both coasts, there was just no room left on the marine 
terminals to discharge vessels.
    Mr. KUSTOFF. Thank you, Mr. Atkins.
    Mr. Turkel, just briefly, since I am out of time.
    We all know about--following up on the supply chain--what 
COVID demonstrated to all of us is we need certain 
manufacturing--like to have all manufacturing--but PPE and 
pharmaceuticals especially closer to home. And to your point, I 
think you outlined it really well about the forced labor.
    My question to you is, government can do what government 
can do. Doesn't private industry itself, though, have some 
responsibility as it relates to the forced labor?
    Mr. TURKEL. Absolutely.
    The private sector has been doing two things.
    One, during the process of passing this bill they were 
opposed to it, as you may recall.
    And then after the bill, this legislation, became a law, 
they are trying to slow down the process of implementation.
    And then the third thing that they are doing is not 
publicly talking about the things that they have done. When you 
ask them, ``Why can't you just go out and tell them that you 
terminated your relationship with a questionable supplier?'' 
they said, ``Oh, there would be retaliation.''
    There is a company called OFILM that makes the iPhone 
screens. Apple let them go. But to this day Apple never talks 
about publicly why they let this company go.
    So, the private sector has a huge responsibility. And now 
they should have found out that this country that they have 
been telling the American people is an ideal place for doing 
business is becoming increasingly hostile.
    Ms. MALLIOTAKIS [presiding]. Thank you very much. Thank you 
very much.
    The chair recognizes Ms. Tenney of New York for 5 minutes.
    Ms. TENNEY. Thank you very much.
    Thank you to the chairman for bringing us here.
    And thank you, Ranking Member Neal.
    And also thank you to my colleague, Nicole Malliotakis, for 
hosting us here. Nicole was part of our special Farm Bureau 
event when we were in the New York State Legislature, adopt a 
New York City Legislator, where we brought her up to upstate 
New York to visit a farm, to see what it is like to grow up on 
a farm.
    And so that is why I am just so excited and glad to be in 
Staten Island for my first time. Sad to say I haven't been here 
sooner. What a beautiful spot.
    And thank you to Mr. Atkins also.
    And I just want to say especially thank you to Mr. 
Hemminger for your great testimony today. You are a very 
popular person on the panel today.
    And we appreciate your leadership in New York as an 
agricultural leader, as someone who started with just a small 
dairy farm and turned it into a large enterprise with real 
automation. We watched your cows. I got to visit the farm and 
watched them waiting in line to get into the self-milking 
machine. That was pretty incredible to see. And then to expand 
into the crops that you do.
    We are grateful that your family is still part of this 
business. I think that is so important, to highlight your 
family is part of all of this, and they are still involved.
    You are devoted to New York State. You face the obstacles, 
and you are continuing to go forward. Not everyone in 
agriculture has been able to do that.
    But, yet, New York State is one of the most important 
agricultural leaders. And, in fact, New York 24, which I 
represent, is the number one agricultural district in the 
Northeast and the number one dairy producer in the Northeast.
    People find that incredible to believe, but I know Ms. 
Malliotakis knows all about that because she has now been to 
upstate New York and toured around, and just to see how 
beautiful it is and how wonderful our soil is, something you 
talked about, the importance of soil, water, the great 
resources we have. And yet we have a government that makes it 
difficult sometimes for us to operate.
    So, at your business, though, I saw a lot of great workers 
who are grateful to you, grateful to your leadership, a lot of 
very happy cows. It seemed they enjoyed a good atmosphere, good 
weather conditions, good nutrition, and that is the secret to 
producing.
    I also wanted to say, your leadership in not just your 
family but everyone--and I wanted to just say, you have this 
expression which I actually wrote--I took a picture of it when 
I was at your firm, and I could see it in your employees, your 
family, your happy cows.
    And Hemdale Farms has this thing called COW TAILS. And the 
C stands for can-do attitude. The O for ownership, and everyone 
has an ownership in the business, including your great 
employees, that are foreign workers in some cases. Winners, 
having fun, and everybody was obviously having fun, especially 
the cows.
    Teamwork. Accepting change, which you have been through in 
order to survive in New York; it is a tough place to be. 
Integrity, which is really important, and a lot of people don't 
understand how important our agriculture businesses are.
    Land and environmental stewardship, something that our 
farmers are doing every day, and preserving our communities and 
our land, our great land. And you mentioned something about 
that in your--and I want to ask you about the solar panels. 
Instead of growing apples, we are growing solar panels as a 
specialty crop. And I say that as a joke.
    And service to community and family.
    And I just want to say this is a great motto that you keep, 
and that is why, I think, a secret to your success.
    Pretty much everyone has asked you about all the different 
issues, whether it is dealing with the USMCA, the unfair trade 
with Canada, your 30-year struggle to get your products into 
Canada and around the world.
    And then you also talked a lot about labor and our farm 
worker labor bill that we have tried to get through in many 
ways and having people understand that, the challenges with E-
Verify.
    But I wanted to ask you a little bit about what I mentioned 
just now, which is the specialty crop known as solar panels, 
and a little bit about what is going on with energy in New York 
State.
    So, the Democrats, who control everything in New York State 
on the government level in terms of the State, just passed a 
$229 billion tax-and-spend package, the largest budget in New 
York State history, even beyond what we thought after the 
American Rescue funds of $12 billion were inserted into it. 
This makes the budget the first ever to ban hookups to natural 
gas coming down the road.
    How is energy impacted in your district, your operation, as 
a multifaceted agricultural industry? And what is the future 
with this? And is this sustainable considering the cost of--
whether we are talking about the cost of fertilizer, 
maintaining your dairy operation, maintaining all of your 
operations, to get them to market?
    Mr. HEMMINGER. Well, thank you for the compliments, 
Congresswoman Tenney.
    We are very concerned about this energy piece. To me, it is 
way too much too fast. You would be interested to know my 
greenhouse operation had the land already to expand to a couple 
more greenhouses waiting for the farm labor bill to get 
resolved. And because of that, and where we are today, we have 
not built those greenhouses. We are turning business away.
    Those greenhouses are heated by propane. No one has figured 
out how to heat a greenhouse efficiently with electric yet. And 
we dry the corn. We have to feed the cows in the winter for 
grain. That portion of their diet we dry with propane. And, of 
course, the robotic milkers are run with electric. And then the 
tractors run with fuel, the trucks with diesel, and whatnot.
    I am very concerned. I am actually confused. I don't 
believe that this is going to work.
    And I will just say again, as I said earlier, we are 
looking more and more at just becoming a grain-only farm and 
having a fraction of the employees we have and buying a big 
combine right now with a little bit of grain. I have a neighbor 
with a great combine who is a great operator run it. And just 
changing our focus and having a lot less employees and a lot 
less balls in the air because we don't believe we are going to 
be able to survive.
    My friends in the fruit business, apple harvest in 
particular is their number one cost. Labor is over half their 
expense at an apple farm. And they are seriously going to 
bulldoze their trees out and put in solar panels.
    In western New York near Batavia, there is a 400- or 500-
acre area of beautiful vegetable ground, farmland that is being 
developed into solar right now.
    I am all pro-solar, but I believe my children or my 
grandchildren's generations will say, ``What were they 
thinking, letting some of the best farmland in the world have 
all these solar panels on it?''
    Ms. MALLIOTAKIS. Thank you.
    Mr. HEMMINGER. I am all pro-solar.
    Ms. MALLIOTAKIS. Thank you, Mr. Hemminger.
    Ms. TENNEY. Thank you so much.
    I yield back.
    Ms. MALLIOTAKIS. I would like to recognize Mr. Moore of 
Utah for 5 minutes.
    Mr. MOORE of Utah. Thank you. Great job hosting. Wonderful 
venue. Thanks for setting this all up for us today.
    Mr. Romano, your line of questioning with my colleague from 
West Virginia actually hit on one of the things I wanted to 
talk about. So, instead, I am going to pivot and actually ask 
you and Mr. Turkel to just reiterate for the group today just 
the salient point in both of your areas.
    Mr. Romano, you are talking a lot about competitiveness 
with China and some of the unfair practices that they are doing 
with respect to international trade.
    Mr. Turkel, we are talking forced labor camps in Xinjiang 
Province with the Uyghur population, something I am proud that 
the U.S. is working on. We are not there yet, but we are taking 
action on this.
    Just clearly communicate to us one more time, what do we 
and the rest of the world or those partners of ours across 
international coalitions need to continue to do or do more of 
to combat both of your areas of influence and expertise?
    Mr. ROMANO. So, as I mentioned, I gave a couple of 
statistics around what is happening in other areas of the world 
where things like Section 301 are not being utilized.
    It is very public what some of the Chinese companies are 
doing. Actually, I have got a document here that shows what the 
largest company did. I made reference to it in my presentation, 
where they are publicly saying they are at 50 percent, they are 
adding more capacity, and their goal is to see the removal of 
Western suppliers.
    So, it is not just in the U.S. We operate on six different 
continents. The U.S., we have our largest TiO2 facility, but we 
also operate on every continent. We sell into 120 different 
countries. We have a plant in Brazil where exports into Brazil 
have gone from 60,000 tons to 90,000 tons. The way they are 
continuing to penetrate, using stolen technology in many 
instances, and then expanding that.
    There is a book called ``Tiger Trap,'' which is a great 
read, and it talks about how over time, decades, the Chinese 
accumulate technology and then eventually start to put that in 
place, and that is what you are seeing now. We have had 
experience with plant closures in Georgia, as I have mentioned. 
We closed a plant in Antwerp. There are at least two companies 
today in Spain and Germany that are looking at closing down.
    So, it is not just the U.S. The U.S. has done a great job 
of managing that and, again, protecting U.S. business, and 
particularly our businesses. But it is continuing to reinforce 
what has been happening and continuing to revaluate, are those 
tariffs high enough?
    Today the Chinese--you can use an average price of our 
product today is around $3,000 a ton. In many instances, we are 
being undercut by more than a thousand dollars a ton, and we 
know these companies are not making money.
    Mr. MOORE of Utah. Thank you.
    Mr. Turkel.
    Mr. TURKEL. Thank you.
    For starters, we have to acknowledge, recognize our own 
problem, which is our complicity in the ongoing atrocity 
crimes. American consumers need to know that more than 80 
global brands that we consume on a daily basis--agricultural 
products, cleaning supplies, solar panels, EV batteries--
literally everything is made with slave labor. I just mentioned 
55,000 entities doing business in the Uyghur homeland, Uyghur 
region. That explains.
    And then, two, we need to close the loophole. The de 
minimus is one of the areas that we need to target.
    I commend the 24 Members of Congress who recently wrote 
asking the SEC to demand the Shein Company to go through 
mandatory independent auditing. That is one way to look at it.
    And then also naming and shaming, it is so important. When 
you deal with the issues at this magnitude, we should not let 
any perpetuators, any bad actors, to stay anonymous.
    We have about 50,000 companies that have been responsible 
for internal labor transfer. We should go after them if 55,000 
is too much to deal with.
    And also, finally, we need to stop investing in our own 
self-destruction. The American people are still investing in 
Chinese high tech. There are 64 companies that have been 
sanctioned because of the human rights abuses. Only 11 of them 
are listed or identified as the companies that the American 
people should not invest, make an investment.
    Mr. MOORE of Utah. Thank you so much.
    Mr. Hemminger, in the few seconds left, just to thank you 
for your work with respect to USMCA. My northern part of Utah, 
where my district is, strong dairy producers. And so, the work 
you are doing can create competitiveness, and making sure we 
are all playing by the same rules is very important.
    And thank you for your comments as well on immigration and 
comprehensive immigration reform. We have to think about every 
step of this, and it is great to hear your perspective.
    So, thank you.
    And I yield the time that I don't have back.
    Ms. MALLIOTAKIS. Thank you very much.
    The chair recognizes Mrs. Steel from California for 5 
minutes.
    Mrs. STEEL. Thank you so much.
    Thank you to all the witnesses coming for this important 
hearing and raising awareness about the issues at our ports.
    Even though the Los Angeles and Long Beach ports are the 
biggest ports in the United States, companies are leaving Long 
Beach and L.A. Ports in California have been in chaos and now 
have turned into ghost towns. West Coast ports have major 
backlog caused in part by ships idling off the coast of 
southern California.
    And to make matters worse, California regulations like AB5 
and new environmental regulations cause independent truckers to 
leave California and they cannot come back in.
    There has also been a yearslong headache around the 
longshoremen's contract, which is still being negotiated. It is 
almost a year now.
    In 2023, the output at Long Beach and L.A. ports are down 
30 percent. You said here 42 percent, but 30 percent compared 
to the first quarter of last year.
    The fiscal year 2023 NDAA included my Supply Chain Task 
Force Act to ensure the government works with our ports to 
improve effectiveness.
    So, Mr. Atkins, our ports need to allow automation, you 
just talked a little bit about it, and modernization to compete 
with our major port. We need to ensure that our ports are 
always modernizing so that we can expand trade and move goods.
    Do you think we can enhance ports with the new technologies 
and automation that will help protect our workers and allow us 
to compete with other ports around the world?
    Mr. ATKINS. Well, that is a fantastic question, and it is 
one that is equal on the East Coast and West Coast.
    I don't think we should confuse automation with 
modernization. Modernization of ports means bigger cranes to 
service the larger ships.
    When we talked about dredging in New York, in 1997, the 
industry thought 5,600 TEUs, twenty-foot equivalents, was going 
to be the biggest ship this harbor would ever see. We are now 
handling 16,000 TEU-sized vessels, and they are scrapping 
vessels smaller than 8,000 TEUs.
    So, modernization really is keeping up with the size of the 
vessels, looking at sustainability with hybrid equipment, all-
electric equipment, and also using data to be able to 
streamline and pass off cargo from one part of the supply chain 
to the other.
    So there needs to be a consistent investment in the harbors 
and the ports to be able to handle the larger ships. And larger 
ships are beneficial to the U.S. consumer because the economy 
of scales of a container load of shoes coming on a 16,000-TEU 
vessel means it is much cheaper transportation costs than on 
the smaller vessel.
    So, it is incumbent upon government and private industry to 
keep investing in the infrastructure and modernizing these 
facilities, and everyone benefits from that.
    Mrs. STEEL. Thank you for that answer.
    I have a question to Mr. Romano.
    I just read a Korean newspaper--I speak Korean as my first 
and Japanese as my second, so I read all these newspapers. And 
CCP--actually, Korea doesn't have those kind of, like, battery-
building materials.
    So, what happened was yesterday they just announced that 
they are going to invest over a trillion dollars to Korea, and 
they are building these batteries, and then they want to sell 
it that it was made in Korea and coming into the United States.
    How are we going to stop these kind of loopholes?
    Mr. ROMANO. Yeah, that is a great question.
    Korea is a big market for us. It is probably the third-
largest market we sell into behind India.
    I made reference to that even in Africa with regards to the 
minerals that are being mined in that area by Chinese producers 
who historically don't own assets there. I was not aware of the 
article you just referenced in Korea.
    But it is one of the biggest struggles that we have. And I 
think the best thing we can do in the U.S. is support 
development of that technology in the U.S., and other countries 
like Korea should do the same.
    Korea is a huge trading partner with China. A lot of our 
business in Korea over the course of--through the pandemic has 
been significantly impacted because China slowed down their 
production; therefore, Korea slowed down theirs.
    So, I think what we are talking about here in the U.S., 
trying to reinforce how we can make in the U.S. and sell in the 
U.S., other countries need to do the same thing.
    Mrs. STEEL. Thank you.
    I yield back.
    Chairman SMITH [presiding]. Thank you.
    Ms. Van Duyne.
    Ms. VAN DUYNE. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.
    China has been aggressively signing trade and economic 
agreements across the Indo-Pacific, Latin America, and in 
Africa, as we all know. The result is that these countries and 
these regions are growing more dependent on Chinese technology 
companies and supply chains, opening the door for China's 
authoritarian digital practices to take root and putting U.S. 
technology companies at a significant competitive disadvantage. 
And this all serves China's broader strategic interests.
    Furthermore, China's lack of transparency and disregard for 
human rights has led to a growing concern among many nations.
    I recently traveled to Cambodia and Singapore to discuss 
trade issues, and the resounding message that we heard was the 
Biden administration continues to leave a void that China is 
more than eager to fill, and as a nation, we must reclaim our 
leadership on the global stage and hold China accountable when 
it comes to its trade and global influence.
    Trade enforcement must be targeted to cut off unfair trade 
while facilitating swift movement of fairly traded products. 
Small businesses facing historically high inflation and a 
protracted supply chain crisis cannot afford all of this 
unnecessary red tape.
    The United States must hold China accountable for its human 
rights abuses and predatory trade practices that devastate 
American jobs. And I am glad to join my colleagues on this 
committee and work to improve our supply chain and advance a 
trade agenda that protects American workers.
    Mr. Turkel, you had mentioned in one of your answers just 
recently, you were talking about how the U.S. needs to stop 
fighting against itself. Can you expand on that?
    Mr. TURKEL. You mean the--can you repeat that question 
again?
    Ms. VAN DUYNE. You had mentioned earlier, in one of your 
last answers, that the U.S. needs to stop fighting itself.
    Mr. TURKEL. Well, yeah, I mentioned that for two reasons.
    One, the American consumers continue to purchase those 
tainted products that have been shipped out of China through 
the global supply chain.
    And then, two, American investors' pension funds are 
fueling this genocide and contributing to the Chinese political 
economy.
    And, finally, the Chinese tech--it is going both ways 
actually--has been so effective, and it is Chinese developed, 
tested, utilized, and now exporting all around the world. And 
some of our Silicon Valley companies that are silent on this 
issue have been helping the Chinese high tech. That is what I 
meant when I said we need to stop.
    Ms. VAN DUYNE. I would also argue that the U.S. Government 
is doing the same thing. Last year, I had introduced an 
amendment when I was on the Transportation Committee, and the 
amendment would prevent the U.S. from importing materials that 
were mined with forced labor or child labor. I couldn't get a 
single Democrat to support that amendment.
    Do you believe that that is happening today? Are we 
importing minerals that have been mined by child or forced 
labor?
    Mr. TURKEL. It is highly likely. I am not a solar panel 
expert, but I have consulted with people who know the industry, 
for example.
    The type of dirty work, using coal to make solar panels, 
specifically Uyghur youth being subject to, is something that 
the Chinese population, the majority Han population, will not 
be involved in and engaging in.
    So based on that, and also the internal migration that has 
been in practice for years, even while I was living in China in 
the 1990s, points to the direction that the Uyghur youth have 
also been subject to forced labor practices.
    Ms. VAN DUYNE. Thank you very much for that answer.
    Mr. Romano, your company is using a supply chain, and it is 
trying to create a rare earth mineral plant in Mississippi.
    Recently the Biden administration signed critical mineral 
agreements with Japan and are currently negotiating with the 
EU. These agreements lack safeguards of where they are sourced, 
where they source their critical minerals, and make us again 
more reliant on China.
    Can you tell me a little bit about what Tronox is doing to 
build up the rare earth domestic industry? And what policies 
can the U.S. purpose to ensure that critical minerals are 
produced here at home?
    Mr. ROMANO. Yeah. Thank you for the question.
    So, as I mentioned earlier, we have for many years been 
mining rare earth materials in the form of monazite and have 
been processing that up until recently and been selling it to 
China.
    So that is where the market is. We talk about how does 
China get to the point where it is today? It is because they 
control the market. They have more than 90 percent of the 
production capacity.
    So, what we are looking at doing now is building a facility 
in Hamilton, Mississippi, where we would take the products that 
we would have historically shipped to China and bring them into 
the U.S. and upgrade those into products that can be used in 
the magnets that I referred to earlier.
    I think there has got to be some sort of--301 is another 
good example of how we have managed our core business, which is 
TiO2, but making sure that China can't do what they have 
historically done, and that is drop the price very quickly 
where it makes it uneconomical for people like us to look at 
investigating expanding what would be a natural transition from 
us for mining those products and selling them to mining them 
and upgrading them and selling them into the U.S.
    We are looking at getting some funding from the U.S., and 
we are making good progress in that area. But I think USTR 301 
trade tariffs have had a huge impact on our business. Those 
kinds of things will help us make sure China doesn't do that to 
us in this particular space around minerals, around rare 
earths.
    Ms. VAN DUYNE. Excellent. Thank you.
    I yield back.
    Chairman SMITH. Thank you.
    Mr. Feenstra is recognized.
    Mr. FEENSTRA. Thank you, Chairman Smith.
    And thank you, Congresswoman Malliotakis, for allowing us 
to be in your district. It is pretty awesome.
    Iowa is one of the largest agricultural producers in the 
world, and my district is at the heart of that. We rank number 
one in virtually all ag categories, including pork, eggs, 
grain, soy, livestock, and so forth. Actually, one out of every 
five jobs in Iowa depends on trade and foreign markets.
    Here is the problem. More than two-thirds of all ag exports 
are traded with six partners: China, Mexico, Canada, Japan, EU, 
and South Korea. They all have the same thing in common: They 
allow, for the most part, free trade agreements. And China, 
obviously, makes up, dangerously, the largest proportion of all 
of these countries combined.
    It is clear that we need to establish more free trade 
agreements. Opening new export markets will help American 
businesses and farmers at the same time to reduce the intense 
dependency on China.
    So, Mr. Hemminger, my question is this. Having more 
customers buying your products with new export markets is 
essential. How important is diversification of export markets 
to your business?
    Mr. HEMMINGER. Well, it is very important. And like I said, 
we wish we could send back to Canada the things that we are 
producing because they are a big competitor of mine with the 
greenhouse business and the vegetable business. So, the 
diversified opportunities are very important.
    We have consciously made a decision not to be just a grain 
farmer. That is just how we are put together. We always grew a 
bunch of vegetables for Birdseye, and now we have transitioned 
to what we are doing now.
    So, to answer your question, I believe that we as a 
country, and also to keep ourselves diversified, diversified 
crops in many, many different markets is critical.
    Mr. FEENSTRA. Yeah. And I wholly agree with you. I mean, 
you think about what is happening right now, when we have such 
a narrow market group of six, a few more here and there. It is 
really worrisome, especially in our commodity markets right 
now, of how that changes price when you have one company 
saying, ``Hey, I am going to buy X and not buy.''
    You talked about Canada. Now you need to think about China, 
Phase 1 and Phase 2 trade deals and stuff like that. Phase 1 
went through; Phase 2 very little.
    Can you just talk a little bit more about that, of when you 
see trade markets failing or that just never happens, for 
instance, like China? How does that affect your business?
    Mr. HEMMINGER. Well, it is real simple: Without markets we 
don't survive. Okay? And that is what happened with Birdseye. I 
started to see my neighbors and competitors and actually some 
cousins leave the business and thought, ``Well, I will be one 
of the survivors.'' Well, in the end it didn't matter. They 
sold every plant, and they are buying stuff overseas.
    But back to your comments about China. I just read this 
week one in six bushels of soybeans produced in the world is 
used by China. You talk about a centralized market. And 
soybeans have become critical to the future, to American ag. 
Certainly, you know more about this than I could ever imagine.
    Mr. FEENSTRA. Well, no, and you hit it on that. Seventy-one 
percent of our soybeans go to China. That is a killer. So, if 
they don't buy it, obviously, we are going to get crushed.
    And I thank you for your comments on that. I mean, this is 
so critical to the American farmer. I just don't hear it from 
the administration, how important agriculture is and how 
important our exports are. And we have Katherine Tai that is 
just sitting on her hands, not doing anything for the ag 
community.
    One other barrier to new export markets is the lack of cold 
chain storage in many of our developing markets. The lack of 
cold chain is one of the major barriers in expanding and 
diversifying markets in new countries. Each year we lose 
billions and billions of perishable food products due to poor 
cold chain system conditions.
    Mr. Hemminger, could you talk about this? Obviously, you 
have dairy. I have a lot of dairy in my district. I also have a 
lot of livestock that is perishable, needs to be refrigerated. 
How does this affect you also when the cold chain storage is 
very weak in a lot of developing countries and how we can 
expand on that?
    Mr. HEMMINGER. Well, it is just common sense. We have to 
have cold chain to maintain all the way to the consumer at the 
other end. And without that, food spoils. So, your point is 
well taken and very important.
    Mr. FEENSTRA. Yeah. Thanks.
    Again, we have talked about expanding markets. We need free 
trade, but we also need developing countries to look at how we 
can handle cold storage. I mean, that, again, helps dairy, 
helps livestock, helps all our producers. And, again, this is 
all tied in.
    And then, finally, I think I have got--if I can see the 
clock--I have got a little bit of time left.
    Mr. Hemminger, you said this in your testimony: GMOs are 
the most important scientific breakthrough in history for the 
future of feeding a hungry world of 8 billion people.
    We know GMOs are so essential, and yet there are a lot of 
countries, like Mexico and others, that are sort of stepping 
back and concerned about this. What would you say to those 
countries?
    Mr. HEMMINGER. There is no scientific base to stand on that 
says that GMOs have any concern at all. You can actually find 
natural GMOs in our foods that have evolved on their own.
    And there is not a question in my mind that as we continue 
to go from 8 billion people that we hit last fall in the world, 
and they are talking about it being at 9 billion people here in 
a bit, that we need science-based technology to feed this 
world. And I just hope we have an infrastructure to get the 
food around the world to the people that need it.
    Mr. FEENSTRA. Well, thank you.
    I want to thank each one of you for each of your 
testimonies. It is so critical that we expand our export market 
and do things, even in the Ag Committee when we have the next 
farm bill coming up, with MAP and other areas, that we can grow 
to expand our export markets. And it has got to be the number 
one thing for me in Agriculture to get done here in the next 
farm bill and through our Ways and Means. It is so essential 
for this country.
    Thank you, and I yield back.
    Chairman SMITH. Thank you.
    I want to thank every member of our committee. I want to 
thank Ranking Member Neal for being here, Republicans and 
Democrats, part of a historical hearing where it is, like I 
said, they say it is the first outside full committee hearing 
in a hundred years, and it is right here in Staten Island.
    I also want to thank the Global Containers Terminals here 
in New York for hosting it, and also the Port Police and Guards 
Union and the International Longshoremen's Association for all 
of your support.
    And, of course, Representative Malliotakis for hosting it. 
We appreciate your hospitality.
    Please be advised that members have 2 weeks to submit 
written questions to be answered later in writing. Those 
questions and your answers will be made part of the formal 
hearing record.
    I want to thank each and every one of you again as well for 
taking time out of your busy schedule and for being here and 
sharing some good information.
    With that, the committee stands adjourned.
    [Whereupon, at 12:34 p.m., the committee was adjourned.]
      

                    LOCAL SUBMISSIONS FOR THE RECORD

=======================================================================

      
    [GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]	
      

                   PUBLIC SUBMISSIONS FOR THE RECORD

=======================================================================

      
   [GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]	
    
                         [all]