[Congressional Record Volume 142, Number 123 (Tuesday, September 10, 1996)]
[Senate]
[Pages S10192-S10194]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

       By Ms. SNOWE:

  S. 2061. A bill to amend title II of the Trade Act of 1974 to clarify 
the definition of domestic industry and to include certain agricultural 
products for purposes of providing relief from injury caused by import 
competition, and for other purposes; to the Committee on Finance.


               The Agricultural Trade Reform Act of 1996

 Ms. SNOWE. Mr. President, I am introducing legislation today 
to give agricultural producers, including potato producers, some 
important and badly needed new tools for combating injurious increases 
in imports from foreign countries.
  The Trade Act of 1974 contains provisions that permit U.S. industries 
to

[[Page S10193]]

seek relief from serious injury caused by increased quantities of 
imports. In practice, however, it has been very difficult for many U.S. 
industries to actually secure action under the act to remedy this kind 
of injury.
  The ineffectiveness of the act results from some of the specific 
language in the statute. Specifically, the law requires the 
International Trade Commission, when evaluating a petition for relief 
from injury, to consider whether the injury affects the entire U.S. 
industry, or a segment of an industry located in a major geographic 
area of the U.S. whose production constitutes a substantial portion of 
the total domestic injury. This language has been interpreted by the 
ITC to mean that all or nearly all of the U.S. industry must be 
seriously injured by the imports before it can qualify for any relief.
  Thus, if an important segment of an industry is being severely 
injured by imports that compete directly with that segment, the 
businesses who comprise this portion of the industry will not have much 
recourse--even though the industry segment in question may employ 
thousands of Americans and generate billions of dollars annually for 
the U.S. economy. In other words, our current trade laws leave large 
segments of an industry that serve particular regions and markets, or 
have other distinguishing features, practically helpless in the face of 
sharp and damaging import surges.

  In addition, even if large industry subdivisions could qualify for 
assistance, the timeframes under the Trade Act for expedited, or 
provisional, relief for agricultural products are too long to respond 
in time to prevent or adequately remedy injury caused by increasing 
imports. At a minimum, 3 months must elapse before any relief can be 
provided, irrespective of the damage that American businesses may 
suffer during that time. And 3 months is an absolute minimum. In 
reality, it could take substantially longer to provide expedited 
relief.
  Mr. President, when it comes to agricultural products, the problems 
in U.S. trade law that I have described are particularly acute. Due to 
their perishable nature, many agricultural products cannot be 
inventoried until imports subside or the ITC grants relief--if the 
industry is so fortunate--many months or even years later. And most 
agricultural producers, who are heavily dependent on credit each year 
to produce and sell a crop, cannot wait that long. They need assistance 
in the short term, while the injury is occurring, if they are going to 
survive an import surge. Also, because crops are grown during 
particular seasons and serve specific markets related to production in 
those growing seasons, the agricultural industry is more prone to 
segmentation. Finally, many of the agricultural industry entities that 
would have to file a petition for relief under the Trade Act are really 
grower groups that do not necessarily have the financial wherewithal to 
spend millions of dollars researching, filing, and pursuing a petition 
before the ITC.
  The bill that I have introduced today is designed to empower 
America's agricultural producers to seek and obtain effective remedies 
for damaging import surges. It will make the Trade Act more user 
friendly for American businesses. Unlike the current law, which sets 
criteria for ITC consideration that are impossible to meet and that do 
not reflect the realities of today's industry, my bill establishes more 
useful criteria. It permits the ITC to consider the impacts of import 
surges on an important segment of an agricultural industry when 
determining whether a domestic industry has been injured by imports. 
This segment is defined as a portion of the domestic industry located 
in a specific geographic area whose collective production constitutes a 
significant portion of the entire domestic industry. The ITC would also 
be required to consider whether this segment primarily serves the 
domestic market in the specific geographic area, and whether 
substantial imports are entering the area.

  Rather than rely solely on an industry petition to initiate an ITC 
review of whether provisional, or expedited, relief deserves to be 
granted, my bill would permit the U.S. Trade Representative or the 
Congress, via a resolution, to request such review.
  Because the time frames in the present law for considering and 
providing provisional relief are so long that the damage from imports 
can already be done well before a decision by the ITC is ever issued, 
this bill would shorten the time frame for provisional relief 
determinations by the ITC by allowing the commission to waive, in 
certain circumstances, the act's requirement that imports be monitored 
by the USTR for at least 90 days.
  And, finally, the bill expands the list of agricultural products 
eligible for provisional relief to include any potato product, 
including processed potato products. Under current law, only perishable 
agricultural products and citrus products are eligible to apply for 
expedited relief determinations. But this narrow eligibility list 
unreasonably excludes important U.S. agribusinesses, such as our frozen 
french fry producers, from the expedited remedies available in the 
Trade Act.
  Major American companies like Ore-Ida and Lamb Weston have reported 
that U.S. companies have lost 150 million pounds of french fry sales in 
the U.S. market to Canada in 1996 alone due to Canadian imports priced 
below market rates. And Canada, particularly the western provinces, has 
dramatically expanded its french fry production capacity to expand 
exports to the United States even further over the next several years. 
Without the changes in my bill, these critical American businesses will 
have no effective means for combating a Canadian import surge in the 
next year.
  For too long, American agriculture has been trying to combat 
sophisticated foreign competition with the equivalent of sticks and 
stones. My bill strengthens the position of American agricultural 
producers in the competitive arena, and will either provide effective 
remedies for agricultural producers, or provide effective deterrents to 
the depredations of their competitors from other countries. I hope 
other Senators with an interest in fair play for our domestic 
agricultural producers will join me in cosponsoring this important 
legislation. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of my 
bill be printed in the Record.
  There being no objection, the bill was ordered to be printed in the 
Record, as follows:

                                S. 2061

       Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of 
     the United States of America in Congress assembled,

     SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

       This Act may be cited as the ``Agricultural Trade Reform 
     Act of 1996''.

     SEC. 2. DEFINITION OF DOMESTIC INDUSTRY, ETC.

       (a) Domestic Industry.--
       (1) In general.--Section 202(c)(6)(A)(i) of the Trade Act 
     of 1974 (19 U.S.C. 2252(c)(6)(A)(i) is amended to read as 
     follows:
       ``(A)(i) The term `domestic industry' means, with respect 
     to an article--
       ``(I) the producers as a whole of the like or directly 
     competitive article or those producers whose collective 
     production of the like or directly competitive article 
     constitutes a major proportion of the total domestic 
     production of such article, or
       ``(II) the producers of a like or directly competitive 
     perishable agricultural product, citrus product, or potato 
     product, in a specific geographic area of the United States 
     whose collective production in such area of such article 
     constitutes a significant proportion of the total domestic 
     production of such article.''.
       (2) Determination by commission.--Section 202(c)(4) of such 
     Act (19 U.S.C. 2252(c)(4)) is amended--
       (1) by striking ``and'' at the end of subparagraph (B),
       (2) by striking the period at the end of subparagraph (C) 
     and inserting ``; and'', and
       (3) by adding at the end the following new subparagraph:
       ``(D) may--
       ``(i) in the case of one or more domestic producers--

       ``(I) who produce a like or directly competitive perishable 
     agricultural product, citrus product, or potato product in a 
     specific geographic area of the United States,
       ``(II) whose production of the product in such area 
     constitutes a significant portion of the domestic industry in 
     the United States, and
       ``(III) who primarily serve the market in such area, and

       ``(ii) if there are substantial imports of a like or 
     directly competitive product in such area,

     treat as such domestic industry only that portion of the 
     production of the product located in such area.''.
       (b) Specific Geographic Area of the United States, Etc.--
     Section 202(c)(6) of such Act (19 U.S.C. 2252(c)(6)) is 
     amended by adding at the end the following new subparagraphs:
       ``(E) The term `specific geographic area of the United 
     States' means a discrete and distinguishable geographic area 
     in the United

[[Page S10194]]

     States in which a perishable agricultural product, citrus 
     product, or potato product is produced.
       ``(F) The term `significant portion of the domestic 
     industry in the United States' means an important, 
     recognizable part of the domestic industry, including a part 
     of the industry characterized by production in the same 
     growing season.''.

     SEC. 3. PROVISIONAL RELIEF.

       (a) In General.--Section 202(d)(1)(C) of the Trade Act of 
     1974 (19 U.S.C. 2252(d)(1)(C)) is amended to read as follows:
       ``(C)(i) If--
       ``(I) a petition filed under subsection (a)--
       ``(aa) alleges injury from imports of a perishable 
     agricultural product, citrus product, or potato product that 
     has been, on the date the allegation is included in the 
     petition, subject to monitoring by the Commission under 
     subparagraph (B) for not less than 90 days; and
       (bb) requests that provisional relief be provided under 
     this subsection with respect to such imports; or
       ``(II) a request made of the President or the Trade 
     Representative, or a resolution adopted by either the 
     Committee on Ways and Means or the Committee on Finance, 
     under subsection (b), states that provisional relief provided 
     under this subsection with respect to such imports may be 
     necessary to prevent or remedy serious injury, or the threat 
     thereof, to the domestic industry

     the Commission shall, not later than the 21st day after the 
     day on which the request was filed, make a determination 
     described in clause (ii), on the basis of available 
     information.
       ``(ii) The determination described in this clause is a 
     determination by the Commission whether increased imports 
     (either actual or relative to domestic production) of the 
     perishable agricultural product, citrus product, or potato 
     product are a substantial cause of serious injury, or the 
     threat thereof, to the domestic industry producing a like or 
     directly competitive perishable agricultural product, citrus 
     product, or potato product and whether either--
       ``(I) the serious injury is likely to be difficult to 
     repair by reason of perishability of the like or directly 
     competitive agricultural product; or
       ``(II) the serious injury cannot be timely prevented 
     through investigation under subsection (b) and action under 
     section 203.''.
       (b) Special Rules for Considering Certain Requests.--
     Section 202(d)(1) of such Act (19 U.S.C. 2252(d)(1)) is 
     amended by adding at the end the following new subparagraph:
       ``(H) In considering a petition filed under subsection (a) 
     or a request or resolution described in subsection (b), the 
     Commission may waive the 90-day monitoring requirement in 
     subparagraph (C)(i)(I)(aa), if--
       ``(i) there is a reasonable expectation, based on all 
     available evidence, including significant increases in 
     production or production capacity for the product occurring 
     in the country from which the like or directly competitive 
     product is imported in the year preceding such petition, 
     request, or resolution that the product will be imported from 
     that country in the current year in such quantities as to be 
     a substantial cause of serious injury, or the threat thereof, 
     to the domestic industry producing a like or directly 
     competitive product; and
       ``(ii) the quantities of imports of the like or directly 
     competitive product from that country reported for the 1-
     month period preceding the date of such petition, request, or 
     resolution are consistent with such expectation.''.
       (c) Conforming Amendments.--
       (1) Section 202(a)(2)(B)(i) of such Act (19 U.S.C. 
     2252(a)(2)(B)(i)) is amended by striking ``subsection 
     (d)(1)(C)(i)'' and inserting ``subsection 
     (d)(1)(C)(i)(I)(aa)''.
       (2) Section 202(d)(1)(A) of such Act (19 U.S.C. 
     2252(d)(1)(A)) are amended by striking ``perishable 
     agricultural product or citrus product'' each place it 
     appears and inserting ``perishable agricultural product, 
     citrus product, or potato product''.
       (3) Section 202(d)(5) of such Act (19 U.S.C. 2252(d)(5)) is 
     amended by adding at the end the following new subparagraph:
       ``(D) The term `potato product' means any potato product 
     including any processed potato product.''.
                                 ______