[Congressional Record Volume 144, Number 41 (Thursday, April 2, 1998)]
[Senate]
[Pages S3157-S3158]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
SENATE CONCURRENT RESOLUTION 88--CALLING ON JAPAN TO ESTABLISH AND
MAINTAIN AN OPEN, COMPETITIVE MARKET FOR CONSUMER PHOTOGRAPHIC FILM AND
PAPER
Mr. D'AMATO (for himself, Mr. Moynihan, Mr. Ashcroft, and Mr.
Bingaman) submitted the following concurrent resolution; which was
referred to the Committee on Finance:
S. Con. Res. 88
Whereas the current financial crisis in Asia underscores
the fact that the health of the international economic system
depends on open, competitive markets;
Whereas structural reform in Japan is critical to the
resolution of the Asian financial crisis;
Whereas for many years the United States Trade
Representative has reported to Congress in the National Trade
Estimate on numerous barriers to entering and operating in
the Japanese market;
Whereas Japan's restrictive policies deny opportunities to
United States companies and their workers seeking access to
Japanese markets;
Whereas the United States Trade Representative has engaged
over the last several years in an intensive review of the
Japanese distribution system;
Whereas on June 16, 1996, the United States Trade
Representative found that the Government of Japan created and
tolerated a market structure that impedes United States
exports of consumer photographic film and paper;
Whereas the European Union has sought to remove these same
barriers to distribution that restrain European exports to
Japan;
Whereas it is important that United States companies and
workers not be disadvantaged by other countries following
Japan's model of protecting its market through a closed
distribution system and other market access barriers;
Whereas a recent panel of the World Trade Organization
failed to address the closed distribution system and market
access barriers in Japan;
Whereas the Government of Japan has consistently stated
that it is committed to deregulation, transparency,
nondiscrimination, and open distribution systems accompanied
by vigorous enforcement of competition laws;
Whereas the Government of Japan stated in recent
proceedings of the World Trade Organization on consumer
photographic film that it is committed to promote
distribution policies that make the Japanese market more open
to imports and to actively discourage restrictive business
practices; and
Whereas fulfilling these public statements would benefit
both United States trade and Japanese consumers,
significantly raising the standard of living in Japan: Now,
therefore, be it
Resolved by the Senate (the House of Representatives
concurring), That the Congress--
(1) calls upon the Government of Japan to live up to the
standards it has set for open competitive markets;
(2) calls upon the Government of Japan to fully implement
the representations that it made to a dispute settlement
panel of the World Trade Organization regarding deregulation,
transparency, nondiscrimination, open distribution systems,
and vigorous enforcement of competition laws with respect to
consumer photographic film and paper as well as other
sectors, such as autos and auto parts, glass, and
telecommunications, that face similar market access barriers
in Japan;
(3) urges the President, the United States Trade
Representative, and other appropriate officers of the
executive branch to exercise fully existing authority to
achieve these objectives; and
(4) requests the President to report to Congress, not later
than July 15, 1998, and not less frequently than every six
months thereafter, regarding progress in eliminating market
restrictions in Japan for consumer photographic film and
paper.
Mr. D'AMATO. Mr. President, the current financial crisis in Asia
underscores the need for open, competitive markets, free from
manipulation. Clearly, industrial policy does not work. Managed trade
and managed commerce is a failure. It simply does not work. Mr.
President, we have said it all along--when you manipulate trade and
erect barriers to open and free trade, the consumer gets hurt.
Mr. President, today we are submitting a resolution which is aimed at
forcing Japan to put their money where their mouth is. This Resolution
makes it clear that Japan must fulfill its publicly stated commitments
to open its markets for photographic film and paper, and other sectors
facing market access barriers. The bureaucrats in Japan should be on
notice that the U.S. Congress will not tolerate their intervention into
the free market. The United States maintains free and open markets in
every sector of the economy. Americans should expect nothing less of
any of our trading partners.
Plain and simple, Mr. President, the Japanese Government has allowed
Fuji to use Japan's lax anti-trust laws and
[[Page S3158]]
closed-market system to erect barriers to free and open competition.
The Japanese government, however, maintains that this is not true and
that their markets are open and free. This Resolution will simply
encourage the Japanese government to demonstrate their openness.
The Government of Japan has said publicly that they did not build,
support, and tolerate a market structure that thwarts foreign
competition, and in which exclusionary business practices are
commonplace. This Resolution simply allows the Japanese government to
demonstrate their resolve to open, free and fair trade.
Mr. MOYNIHAN. Mr. President, I wish to associate myself fully with
the remarks of my distinguished colleague from New York. Kodak has
compiled volumes of evidence, based on more than 100 years of
experience in the Japanese market, that clearly document the thicket of
laws and regulations that have the intent--and the effect--of curbing
sales of foreign photographic film and paper. Through an elaborate
system of restrictions on sales and distribution, Japan has succeeded
in severely limiting market access for foreign film and paper.
Nearly three years ago, on May 18, 1995, Kodak filed a petition with
the U.S. Trade Representative under section 301 of the Trade Act of
1974, urging action on the broad range of trade barriers. After a
formal investigation, Ambassador Barshefsky found that Japan's
practices were indeed in violation of our trade laws, and dispute
settlement proceedings in the World Trade Organization were begun. The
verdict from the WTO, issued in its final form on January 30, 1998, was
a great disappointment. But certainly not the end of the argument, nor
the end of Kodak's attempts to penetrate the Japanese market.
The resolution that I am pleased to cosponsor today emphatically
endorses the initiative that Ambassador Barshefsky and Secretary Daley
unveiled on February 3, 1998, which will put the Government of Japan to
the test. During the course of the WTO proceedings, as my colleagues
are aware, the Japanese Government asserted that its market was fully
open to foreign film and paper. And so our government has proposed that
we monitor that proposition, by collecting data and examining, every
six months, the progress that Kodak--and other foreign suppliers--have
made in competing in the Japanese film and paper market.
This initiative is worthy of our support, Mr. President, and I urge
my colleagues to join in supporting this resolution.
Mr. ASHCROFT. Mr. President, The World Trade Organization (WTO)
decision this year against the United States' photographic film and
paper industry sounded an alarm for U.S. companies participating in the
global arena. Rubber stamping Japanese-style protectionism, the WTO
left American companies at a troubling disadvantage in Japan and other
Asian countries that replicate the ``successful'' Japanese model. It is
troubling that many ailing Asian economies, after being bailed out by
U.S. tax dollars, are still pursuing protectionist trade practices
against the very taxpayers that paid their bill.
In the film case, the WTO found that the Japanese market is open to
the Eastman Kodak Co., despite the fact that Japan admits that its
system of trade barriers was designed as a ``defensive measure for the
substantial advances of Eastman Kodak after import liberalization''
under the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT). This decision
flies in the face of the U.S. film industry.
Equally intolerable is the fact that this Japanese-style
protectionism is being used to block an array of critical U.S. exports.
Even though Japan has the second largest flat glass market in the
world, it has systematically excluded foreign imports through an
exclusive distribution system in violation of its 1995 Flat Glass
Agreement with the United States. The U.S. also has a ``market
opening'' agreement with Japan on automobiles, but the Administration
reported just recently that Japan has failed to keep the agreement's
``key objectives'' and has reversed progress made last year under the
accord.
I am deeply alarmed at the danger that the WTO's misconceived ruling
in this case will have. Japan now has a license from the WTO to shelter
its domestic film and paper producers from competition. Under the WTO
ruling, our Asian trading partners will be encouraged to follow in
Japan's protectionist footsteps by taking two steps back for every one
step forward in trade liberalization. For instance, China recently
announced reductions in overall tariff levels from 23 to 17 percent,
but China has been implementing an automobile industrial policy much
like Japan's to undercut the gains achieved from tariff reductions.
It is time to stand up and say, ``No more.'' No more will we ignore
mercantilist trade policies that block U.S. products and destroy
American jobs. No more will we allow foreign companies to use their
illegitimate gains from their closed market to subsidize exports to our
open market. No more will we accept a playing field for our products
that is not level. No more, Mr. President.
As the world's second largest economy, Japan must guarantee the same
free and open access to its market as Japanese companies enjoy in the
U.S. market. Without that guarantee, U.S. businesses are put at an
immediate competitive disadvantage when entering the international
arena.
Therefore, Senators D'Amato, Moynihan, Bingaman, and I rise today to
submit a Sense of the Senate that the U.S. should use all available
tools against Japan's toleration of a systematic anticompetitive market
that impedes U.S. exports. We need to be able to reassure American
companies and the many U.S. workers they employ that we are tough on
countries that break the rules of free trade.
We also request the Clinton Administration take swift and aggressive
action to open Japan's market, not just for film, but also for the U.S.
industries that repeatedly struggle to address the intricate web of
Japanese protectionism.
The Administration must confront Japan's trade barriers forcefully,
or the competitiveness of U.S. companies in that market will be
continually undermined. In 1996, the U.S. Trade Representative made a
finding under Section 301 that Japan's restrictions on Kodak film were
a burden to U.S. commerce and an impediment to U.S. film exports.
However, the USTR office stated that using Section 301 to address such
trade barriers is too aggressive a policy. I strongly disagree.
When the United States makes trade agreements, the American people
expect them to be honored. If trade agreements can be violated without
sanction by the WTO, then our rights must be secured through the use of
our own law. The only alternative is to accept a new wave of
protectionism in Japan and other nations.
I supported the Senate proposal on ``fast track'' authority for the
President, but if this Administration is unable to ensure that our
trading partners live up to their promises under agreements already
negotiated, I see little reason to think that Congress will give fast
track authority to pursue a new round of agreements. The Administration
claims to have negotiated 30 separate free trade agreements with Japan,
but U.S. exporters clearly are being denied the benefits they had
expected from these agreements. Congress and the American people
rightfully expect the Administration to ensure a level playing field
for U.S. companies. The WTO's intolerable ruling in the Kodak film case
requires you and your colleagues in the Administration to take a more
activist and aggressive approach to opening Japanese markets across the
board, before protectionism proliferates throughout Asia.
____________________