[Congressional Record Volume 143, Number 111 (Thursday, July 31, 1997)]
[House]
[Pages H6680-H6682]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




 EXPRESSING THE SENSE OF CONGRESS REGARDING MEXICO'S ANTIDUMPING DUTIES

  Mr. CRANE. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on 
Ways and Means be discharged from further consideration of the Senate 
concurrent resolution (S. Con. Res. 43) urging the United States Trade 
Representative immediately to take all appropriate action with regards 
to Mexico's imposition of antidumping duties on United States high 
fructose corn syrup, and ask for its immediate consideration.
  The Clerk read the title of the Senate concurrent resolution.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the 
gentleman from Illinois?
  Mr. EWING. Reserving the right to object, Mr. Speaker, I yield to the 
gentleman from Illinois [Mr. Crane].
  Mr. CRANE. Mr. Speaker, Senate Concurrent Resolution 43 expresses the 
sense of Congress that the government of Mexico should review carefully 
whether it initiated an anti-dumping investigation against United 
States exports of high fructose corn syrup in conformity with WTO 
standards. It urges the United States Trade Representative to take all 
appropriate measures with regard to the imposition of preliminary anti-
dumping duties on U.S. exports of high fructose corn syrup.

[[Page H6681]]

  These duties, which range from 61 percent to 102 percent, were 
imposed on June 25 as the result of a petition filed by the Mexican 
sugar industry. There is a question as to whether the Mexican 
Government adequately investigated if domestic producers of HFCS in 
Mexico are supportive of the petition. In light of the fact that United 
States corn growers and refiners, including many in my State of 
Illinois, are suffering the serious disruption of potentially 
prohibitive tariffs on their sales in Mexico, I urge my colleagues to 
support this resolution.
  I also want to pay tribute to my distinguished colleague from down 
state, he is more corn country than I am, because of his active 
involvement in getting Senate Concurrent Resolution 43 reported over to 
the House.
  Mr. EWING. Mr. Speaker, I am not going to object, of course, to this 
resolution being brought, but I want to thank the distinguished 
gentleman from Illinois [Mr. Crane], the chairman of the Subcommittee 
on Trade of the Committee on Ways and Means.
  Our colleague, the gentleman from Illinois, Glen Poshard, and myself 
have been most interested in seeing this resolution brought to the 
floor. I would just rise in strong support of the concurrent 
resolution, which talks about Mexico's recent decision to impose anti-
dumping duties.
  Prior to our adoption of the NAFTA treaty, duties on high fructose 
corn syrup were 15 percent. This year, under a negotiated agreement, 
they should have dropped to 9.5 percent. Duties now in effect because 
of this decision are as much as four to five times greater and above 
the pre-NAFTA level.
  Mr. Speaker, this case involves both important matters of 
international trade policy and vital trade interests of the U.S. 
agricultural producers.
  I would just like do elaborate for a moment. First, the preliminary 
findings of the Mexican Government were reached in what I believe is in 
violation of the World Trade Organization code on dumping 
investigation. The code requires that the government fully investigate 
allegations brought by private parties before opening government 
investigations.
  In this case, it is my opinion that the Mexican sugar industry 
presented an inaccurate allegation and that there was no production of 
high fructose corn syrup in Mexico. I believe this to be wrong, and 
that the Mexican authorities should have known, if they did not, that 
it was wrong, and ignored their evidence that might have been available 
to them.
  By itself this is grounds for dismissal of the case. Simply put, the 
Mexican sugar industry does not have standing under the WTO code to 
file this case, and the Government of Mexico chose to ignore that fact, 
for whatever reasons may have been expedient to them.
  There is a second flaw. The Mexican authorities have failed to 
demonstrate that the high fructose corn syrup and the Mexican sugar are 
like products under the internationally accepted anti-dumping code. 
Beyond both the technical and the procedural flaws raised in the case, 
which should require its immediate dismissal, this action raises 
serious political and economic problems.
  Mr. Speaker, I represent one of the four largest corn-producing 
districts in the U.S. Corn refining adds another $100 million to the 
value of the corn crop in my district, and I cannot stand idly by and 
allow others with whom we are trading to deny us access to their 
important markets. I hope that the Members will join me in supporting 
our corn farmers and processors, and send a strong message to the 
Mexican Government that we intend to defend the trading rights we have 
negotiated. I would ask for the adoption of this amendment.
  Mr. EWING. I withdraw my reservation of objection, Mr. Speaker.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the 
gentleman from Illinois?
  Mr. POSHARD. Mr. Speaker, reserving the right to object, I rise today 
in strong support of this concurrent resolution, which criticizes 
Mexico's recent decision to impose antidumping duties against U.S. 
exports of high fructose corn syrup.
  Prior to NAFTA, duties on high fructose corn syrup were 15 percent 
and were to be phased out over 10 years. Duties now in effect as a 
result of the Mexican Government's recent decision are four to five 
times the pre-Nafta levels.
  Mexico would like us to believe that their small sugar mills are 
being overrun by large U.S. corporations. In reality, however, a small 
number of individuals own a very large share of the Mexican sugar 
mills. It is interesting to note that these same individuals rely 
heavily upon U.S. financial markets to fund their goals in expanding 
markets. I would suggest to my colleagues that perhaps it is time for 
Congress to review whether or not we want our financial markets open to 
those who refuse to compete against U.S. products.
  Mr. Speaker, Mexico's action against fructose violates the standards 
of the World Trade Agreement, of which Mexico and the United States are 
Members. Important issues of standing and injury have been ignored and 
the Mexican Government has failed to investigate allegations known to 
be false.
  On procedural grounds alone, this case should be dismissed. However, 
in addition to its procedural and technical flaws, Mexico's action 
raises serious economic concerns for this Nation and for my 
southeastern Illinois district. The 1996 farm bill eliminated 
traditional price supports available to U.S. corn farmers and replaced 
them with a phased-down market transition payment. Farmers were told 
that they must generate their income from the market, particularly the 
growing international market.
  Mexico's decision to impose antidumping duties on U.S. exports of 
high fructose corn syrup, if left unchallenged, represents in my 
judgment a breach of faith with Illinois corn farmers, who were assured 
of their right to pursue markets around the world.
  My district is home to several large corn refining plants which 
provide direct employment for over 2,000 of my constituents. It is 
estimated that corn refining adds over $70 million to the value of the 
corn crop in my district. Last year, consumption of high fructose corn 
syrup represented a market for about 500 million bushels of U.S. corn.
  Mr. Speaker, I cannot allow competitive U.S. products to be shut out 
of this critical market. I hope my colleagues will join me and the 
other gentlemen from Illinois, Mr. Crane, and Mr. Ewing, in supporting 
our corn farmers and processors, and send a strong message to the 
Mexican Government that we intend to defend the trading rights that we 
have negotiated.
  Most importantly, I hope all Members will join us in sending a 
message to our farmers that we have not forgotten the promises of the 
1996 farm bill and that the U.S. Congress will defend their right to 
export.
  Mr. Speaker, I withdraw my reservation of objection.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the 
gentleman from Illinois?
  There was no objection.
  The Clerk read the Senate concurrent resolution, as follows:
       Whereas the North American Free Trade Agreement (in this 
     resolution, referred to as ``the NAFTA'') was intended to 
     reduce trade barriers between Canada, Mexico and the United 
     States;
       Whereas the NAFTA represented an opportunity for corn 
     farmers and refiners to increase exports of highly 
     competitive United States corn and corn products;
       Whereas corn is the number one United States cash crop with 
     a value of $25,000,000,000;
       Whereas United States corn refiners are highly efficient, 
     provide over 10,000 nonfarm jobs, and add over $2,000,000 of 
     value to the United States corn crop;
       Whereas the Government of Mexico has initiated an 
     antidumping investigation into imports of high fructose corn 
     syrup from the United States which may violate the 
     antidumping standards of the World Trade Organization;
       Whereas on June 25, 1997, the Government of Mexico 
     published a Preliminary Determination imposing very high 
     antidumping duties on imports of United States high fructose 
     corn syrup;
       Whereas there has been concern that Mexico's initiation of 
     the antidumping investigation was motivated by political 
     pressure from the Mexican sugar industry rather than the 
     merits of Mexico's antidumping law: Now, therefore, be it
       Resolved by the Senate (the House of Representatives 
     concurring), That it is the sense of Congress that--
       (1) the Government of Mexico should review carefully 
     whether it properly initiated this antidumping investigation 
     in conformity with the standards set forth in the World Trade 
     Organization Agreement on Antidumping, and should terminate 
     this investigation immediately;

[[Page H6682]]

       (2) if the United States Trade Representative considers 
     that Mexico initiated this antidumping investigation in 
     violation of World Trade Organization standards, and if the 
     Government of Mexico does not terminate the antidumping 
     investigation, then the United States Trade Representative 
     should immediately undertake appropriate measures, including 
     actions pursuant to the dispute settlement provisions of the 
     World Trade Organization.

  The Senate concurrent resolution was concurred in.
  A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.

                          ____________________