[Congressional Record Volume 143, Number 149 (Thursday, October 30, 1997)]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Page E2127]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

[[Page E2127]]



           KODAK'S DIFFICULTIES REVEAL JAPAN'S TRADE BARRIERS

                                 ______
                                 

                           HON. PHIL ENGLISH

                            of pennsylvania

                    in the house of representatives

                      Wednesday, October 29, 1997

  Mr. ENGLISH of Pennsylvania. Mr. Speaker, as the Japanese Government 
continues to systematically deny Japanese consumers fair and 
competitive access to America's Eastman Kodak Company's film and paper 
products, it is critical to maintain pressure on the administration to 
resolve this case. This case has far-reaching ramifications for our 
Nation's export potential. With that in mind, I respectfully submit the 
following article outlining the importance of a positive resolution of 
this case for my home State of Pennsylvania.

           [From the Harrisburg Patriot News, Oct. 17, 1997]

           Kodak's Difficulties Reveal Japan's Trade Barriers

                         (By Clifford L. Jones)

       In the current and continuing congressional debate over 
     foreign trade, the issue foremost in everyone's mind is the 
     assurance that as trade barriers fall, they must fall equally 
     for every trading partner. American workers, American 
     companies are not afraid of competition, but we must insist 
     on fairness in foreign markets.
       Unfortunately, one of America's long-time trading partners 
     continues to stick its thumb in the eye of American business. 
     Japan continues to insist on tilting the playing field in 
     their favor. That practice must be brought to an end, if not 
     by Japan then mandated by enforcement actions by the World 
     Trade Organization. And, if the World Trade Organization 
     refuses to act in the face of blatant disregard for fairness 
     in the marketplace, then America must rethink its actions in 
     trade matters. In a few months, the World Trade Organization, 
     the international arbiter of free and fair trading, is 
     expected to settle a dispute that could affect every family 
     in Pennsylvania.
       The United States government has charged the Japanese 
     government with systematic denial of fair and competitive 
     access to Japanese consumers by America's Eastman Kodak 
     Company.
       Although this case involves photographic film and paper, it 
     could just as easily have been brought on behalf of 
     chemicals, telecommunications, agriculture or medical 
     technology. There is a growing list of American industries 
     thwarted by Japan's regulations which effectively protect 
     Japanese business from foreign competition.
       This case is important to all Americans, not just for Kodak 
     employees, because exports are increasingly vital to our 
     nation's economic well-being. By expanding sales of American 
     products overseas, we create new jobs, higher incomes and a 
     better standard of living at home. If the United States wins 
     this case, other companies, including many in Pennsylvania, 
     should find it easier to enter the Japanese market.
       The United States has brought a fundamental challenge to 
     the Japanese way of doing business. For 30 years, Japan has 
     sought the benefits of lower tariffs to create new overseas 
     markets for its own goods while firmly establishing 
     restrictions on the entry of American products into its 
     marketplace. For three decades, through three rounds of 
     international negotiations, the Japanese government has 
     promised and, yet, refused to eliminate major trade barriers.
       It has replaced formal trade barriers with a complex series 
     of laws and regulations. In fact, after the first round of 
     negotiations in 1967, the Japanese Cabinet stated that it 
     would be a ``basic necessity'' to protect domestic 
     industry from foreign competition.
       Kodak's on-going problems with marketing in Japan are 
     indicators of the difficulties encountered by most U.S. 
     industries as they attempt to compete fairly in Japan. In the 
     last three decades Kodak has invested significant resources 
     in the Japanese market and yet Kodak has managed to secure a 
     market share nowhere near what it is in every other market in 
     the free world.
       Something, quite obviously, is wrong.
       Kodak's market share is not the result of Japanese 
     preference for domestic brands. Most Japanese consumers 
     simply are unable to find Kodak products in stores. Unlike 
     Japanese makers of photographic paper and film with totally 
     free and fair access to the U.S. market, Kodak is able to 
     reach only a small percentage of the market in Japan.
       Unbelievably, Japan has consistently refused to even 
     discuss this situation with the United States, one of its 
     staunchest allies.
       Common sense tells us that if trade barriers fall, foreign 
     firms should capture a larger share of the market. In other 
     countries when governments have honored their commitments, to 
     free trade, Kodak's share has risen. This has not happened in 
     Japan.
       The Kodak case is also important to our relationship with 
     such East Asian nations as China, Taiwan and South Korea, all 
     of whom are following to some degree the Japanese model of 
     export-led growth in combination with a protected domestic 
     market.
       If the United States case is successful, it will send a 
     firm warning to other nations that they, too, must honor 
     their commitments to free trade--or suffer the consequences. 
     Recognizing the historic nature of the case the European 
     Union is supporting the United States before the World Trade 
     Organization.
       I believe that the evidence supporting Kodak is 
     overwhelming and there is only one reasonable conclusion. 
     Let's hope for the sake of U.S. industry and for American 
     workers that the World Trade Organization arrives at that 
     conclusion. Such a determination will have the additional 
     benefit of calming many of the congressional fears over 
     proposals for continuing America's and the world's march to 
     free trade.

     

                          ____________________