[Congressional Record Volume 141, Number 65 (Friday, April 7, 1995)]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Pages E819-E820]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]


                           WTO COMMISSION ACT

                                 ______


                          HON. SANDER M. LEVIN

                              of michigan

                    in the house of representatives

                        Thursday, April 6, 1995
  Mr. LEVIN. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to join my colleague, the 
gentleman from New York, in introducing the WTO Dispute Settlement 
Review Commission Act. This is an important piece of legislation 
designed to ensure that our rights as a nation to defend industries and 
workers from foreign unfair trade practices are not diminished by the 
new World Trade Organization dispute settlement system.
  Last year, Congressman Houghton and I worked together in the Ways and 
Means Committee and helped secure GATT implementing legislation that 
preserved the effectiveness of our trade laws against dumping, 
subsidies, and other unfair trade practices. These laws are a critical 
last line of defense for American workers and companies facing unfair 
trade restrictions. These laws have been on the books in one form or 
another for over 70 years.
  But writing good laws in the Congress is not enough. Under the new 
World Trade Organization, the United States will no longer have the 
ability to veto an international dispute settlement decision against 
us, even if we think it was wrongly decided. This creates a tremendous 
temptation for some of our trading partners who have been disciplined 
by our trade laws to use the new dispute settlement process to 
undermine the effectiveness of those laws. Many foreign trade 
negotiators have said they will attempt to use the WTO to invalidate 
section 301 or to force certain changes in the way the Department of 
Commerce enforces the antidumping laws.
  We have a concrete example in our current negotiations with Japan in 
the Framework talks. The Japanese trade minister has threatened to 
bring a WTO case against the United States if we impose section 301 
sanctions against Japan for its barriers to United States autos and 
auto parts. In effect, the Japanese want to use the WTO--which is 
supposed to keep markets open--to keep the Japanese market closed.
  Mr. Speaker, we cannot allow this kind of abuse of the WTO. This bill 
is designed to create a fair and impartial process to review WTO 
decisions, and to provide the Congress with a mechanism to bring about 
changes in the WTO if it is misused.
  The bill establishes a WTO Dispute Settlement Review Commission 
composed of five Federal appellate judges, appointed by the President 
in consultation with the Congress. The Commission will review every 
decision against the United States by a WTO panel. Where a panel has 
applied the proper standard of review, and did not exceed or abuse its 
authority, no further action would be warranted. But if the Commission 
determines that a panel reached an inappropriate result that amounts to 
abuse of its mandate, the Commission would so inform the Congress. Any 
Member of Congress would then have the right to introduce a privileged 
resolution directing the U.S. Trade Representative to negotiate 
amendments to the WTO dispute settlement rules to fix the situation.
  And if the Commission determines that WTO panels have abused their 
mandate on three separate occasions in any 5-year period, Members would 
have the right to introduce a privileged resolution directing that the 
United States withdraw from the WTO by a date certain if one last 
effort to amend it fails.
  This basic arrangement was agreed to by our U.S. Trade Representative 
Mickey Kantor during last year's GATT debate. I think Ambassador Kantor 
deserves credit for recognizing the legitimacy of this issue and 
working with Members of Congress, both Democrats and Republicans, to 
craft a fair solution.
  [[Page E820]] The Commission may find that its very first case 
involves Japan and the auto sector. If Japan carries through on its 
threat to appeal to the WTO rather than open its markets, and if the 
WTO panel were to rule against us--an occurrence I do not foresee in 
view of the clearly exclusionary and discriminatory practices presently 
undertaken or tolerated by the Government of Japan--this would raise a 
serious question about whether the new WTO dispute settlement process 
is really in our national interest. I would expect a very careful 
review of that decision by the Review Commission, with appropriate 
recommendations to the Congress.
  But it is my sincere hope that the mere existence of the Commission 
will encourage appropriate use of the WTO and will discourage WTO 
panels from acting beyond their authority when such cases are brought.
  Finally, let me also speak to the final section of the bill, which 
provides that private parties may participate with the USTR in WTO 
dispute settlement proceedings. Under our legislation, if a U.S. 
private party with a direct economic interest in a WTO proceeding 
supports the U.S. Government's position, then the USTR must permit the 
party to participate in the WTO panel process. This private party 
participation is critical to protecting American jobs. Because the 
dispute settlement decisions will be binding, it is imperative that the 
interests of American companies and their workers be fully represented. 
This is not meant as a criticism of USTR in any way. But given the 
reality of USTR's many obligations in negotiating with countries around 
the world, they need the help of the private sector.
  Mr. Speaker, this is an important piece of bipartisan legislation, 
and I hope we can move quickly to see it enacted into law.


                          ____________________