[Congressional Record Volume 144, Number 142 (Saturday, October 10, 1998)]
[House]
[Pages H10400-H10405]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




    PRIVILEGES OF THE HOUSE--FAILURE OF U.S. GOVERNMENT TO ENFORCE 
                    ANTIDUMPING LAWS REGARDING STEEL

  Mr. VISCLOSKY. Mr. Speaker, I rise to a question of the privileges of 
the House and offer a privileged resolution that I noticed pursuant to 
rule IX and ask for its immediate consideration.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Clerk will report the resolution.
  The Clerk read as follows:

                               Resolution

       A resolution, in accordance with House Rule IX, Clause 1, 
     expressing the sense of the House that its integrity has been 
     impugned because the anti-dumping provisions of the Trade and 
     Tariff Act of 1930, (Subtitle B of title VII) have not been 
     expeditiously enforced;
       Whereas the current financial crises in Asia, Russia, and 
     other regions have involved massive depreciation in the 
     currencies of several key steel-producing and steel consuming 
     countries, along with a collapse in the domestic demand for 
     steel in these countries; Whereas the crises have generated 
     and will continue to generate surges in United States imports 
     of steel, both from the countries whose currencies have 
     depreciated in the crisis and from steel producing countries 
     that are no longer able to export steel to the countries in 
     economic crisis;
       Whereas United States imports of finished steel mill 
     products from Asian steel producing countries--the People's 
     Republic of China, Japan, Korea, India, Taiwan, Indonesia, 
     Thailand, and Malaysia--have increased by 79 percent in the 
     first 5 months of 1998 compared to the same period in 1997;
       Whereas year-to-date imports of steel from Russia now 
     exceed the record import levels of 1997, and steel imports 
     from Russia and Ukraine now approach 2,500,000 net tons;
       Whereas foreign government trade restrictions and private 
     restraints of trade distort international trade and 
     investment patterns and result in burdens on United States 
     commerce, including absorption of a disproportionate share of 
     diverted steel trade;
       Whereas the European Union, for example, despite also being 
     a major economy, in 1997 imported only one-tenth as much 
     finished steel products from Asian steel producing countries 
     as the United States did and has restricted imports of steel 
     from the Commonwealth of Independent States, including 
     Russia;
       Whereas the United States is simultaneously facing a 
     substantial increase in steel imports from countries within 
     the Commonwealth of Independent States, including Russia, 
     caused in part by the closure of Asian markets;
       Whereas there is a well-recognized need for improvements in 
     the enforcement of United States trade laws to provide an 
     effective response to such situations: Now, therefore, be it
       Resolved by the House of Representatives, That the House of 
     Representatives calls upon the President to--
       (1) take all necessary measures to respond to the surge of 
     steel imports resulting from the financial crises in Asia, 
     Russia, and other regions, and for other purposes;
       (2) pursue enhanced enforcement of United States trade laws 
     with respect to the surge of steel imports into the United 
     States, using all remedies available under those laws 
     including offsetting duties, quantitative restraints, and 
     other authorized remedial measures as appropriate;
       (3) pursue with all tools at his disposal a more equitable 
     sharing of the burden of accepting imports of finished steel 
     products from Asia and the countries within the Commonwealth 
     of Independent States;
       (4) establish a task force within the executive branch with 
     responsibility for closely monitoring United States imports 
     of steel; and
       (5) report to the Congress by no later than January 5, 
     1999, with a comprehensive plan for responding to this import 
     surge, including ways of limiting its deleterious effects on 
     employment, prices, and investment in the United States steel 
     industry.

  Mr. VISCLOSKY (during the reading). Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous 
consent that the resolution be considered as read and printed in the 
record.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. By practice, the resolution is read in full.
  The Clerk completed reading the resolution.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Does any Member desire to be heard on 
whether the resolution presents a question of the privileges of the 
House?
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Indiana (Mr. Visclosky).
  Mr. VISCLOSKY. Mr. Speaker, I offer this question of privilege to 
bring attention to a catastrophic situation facing this Nation. The 
trade laws that the Congress has enacted over the last 60 years are 
designed to ensure that American workers are not hurt by unfair and 
illegal trade practices. Congressional intent, as represented by the 
Trade and Tariff Act of 1930, is being ignored at the present time.

                              {time}  1250

  The U.S. steel industry and its workers are suffering because the 
Asian and Russian financial crises have led those countries to dump 
their steel on our market. The U.S. has been reluctant to stop this 
illegal practice. Steel that was formerly produced for domestic 
consumption in Asia is now being shipped to the United States where it 
is sold at prices below the cost of production. Steel prices in the 
United States have fallen 20 percent in the last 3 months alone.
  The European Union has protected itself and its steel industry 
against dumping by erecting temporary barriers to steel imports during 
the crisis. Their steel industry is weathering the storm. In America, 
the demand for domestic steel has decreased dramatically in mills in 
Alabama, West Virginia, Utah, Ohio, Iowa, Indiana, and workers have 
been laid off because of the decreased demand for American steel. 
American workers should not have to pay the price of the 
administration's refusal to enforce trade laws which the Congress has 
enacted and supports. This impinges on the integrity of this House.
  American steel workers, the most efficient in the world, cannot 
continue to be besieged by foreign steel products while waiting 
indefinitely for trade cases to be settled. Damage to the American 
steel industry is extensive, severe and rapidly growing. We need to 
protect our American steel workers by stemming the tide of illegally 
dumped steel, and the administration's failure to act again directly 
impinges on the integrity of this House.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Calvert). The Chair is prepared to hear 
argument on this question of privilege from other Members, including 
those

[[Page H10401]]

who have noticed virtually identical resolutions on this topic, in lieu 
of entertaining those other resolutions separately today.
  This comports with the principle that recognition on a question of 
order is within the discretion of the Chair. Members must address the 
question of order.
  Mr. BERRY. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to talk about the steel crisis 
that is escalating out of control and is having a devastating effect on 
the people of the First Congressional District of Arkansas as well as 
people around the country. I am a free trader so long as the rules of 
free trade are rigorously enforced. Fair trade is imperative to support 
free trade.
  What is not fair is the export of the Asian and Russian crisis to our 
shores. Currently Japanese and Russian and other foreign steel 
companies are unable to sell their excess capacity at home. These 
foreign steel producers are dumping their products on the U.S. market 
by selling at prices less than their cost and below those in their home 
markets.
  As a result, this growing steel import crisis is causing injury to 
our domestic steel companies and the industry. It is threatening the 
jobs of people in the First Congressional District of Arkansas and 
across America. As a result, the steel imports in May 1998 increased 
28.5 percent from their level of the previous year. Through June 1998 
the imports from Japan were up 113.7 percent, while imports from Korea 
rose 89.5 percent.
  Mr. Speaker, we need to protect American workers and American 
industry by stopping the illegal dumping of steel from other countries. 
Now is the time to act. We have the responsibility and the opportunity 
to correct this problem, and I assure my colleagues that I will do 
everything I can to help. We can win, but we must fight.
  Mr. TRAFICANT. Mr. Speaker, I am not addressing and will not address 
the deplorable plight and condition of the steel industry at this time. 
But I believe there are some precedents in legal arguments concerning 
the privileges of the House and its Members to advance privileged 
resolutions. I would like to make those arguments, and I want to make 
it clear through the legislative intent and history of today's request 
for a vote that we are challenging past precedents on the rulings and 
questions of privilege, and today's efforts are another step forward to 
bring back to the powers of the House those which the Constitution 
deems are within the jurisdictional authority of the House.
  Having said that, specifically article I, section 8 clearly states 
that Congress shall regulate commerce with foreign nations. Congress. 
Not the White House, not the Trade Rep, not the World Trade 
Organization. Although they can assist the Congress, they do not have 
the mandated authority to undertake the actions necessary for remedy in 
this condition. And I hope Congress is listening. I know they want to 
get out of here. But let us not talk about steel. Let us talk about the 
Constitution.
  Having said that, I believe that this matter of privilege today is 
within the scope of the United States House of Representatives for the 
following reasons. While I admit past precedents did not destroy the 
powers of Congress, the decisions of past Congresses, as upheld by the 
Chair, have diminished the Congress, specifically the House of the 
people. In that regard, the legal question is, if congressional powers 
are being diminished and there is a condition that does not lend itself 
to remedy by the House who has the mandated power to remedy, then the 
resolution must be heard on cause.
  So the Traficant appeal is saying, by the nature of past decisions, 
Parliamentarians and the Chair have upheld denying the resolutions of 
privilege, while I maintain that decision has created a diminishing 
power and authority that is duly granted to the Constitution, duly 
granted to the Members of the House of Representatives, and strips us 
of those powers specifically. That is what my question of a ruling is 
on.


                         Parliamentary Inquiry

  Mr. TRAFICANT. Mr. Speaker, having said that, I would like a 
parliamentary inquiry with the Speaker.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman may state his inquiry.
  Mr. TRAFICANT. Is article I, section 8 of the Constitution clearly in 
force?
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Chair cannot interpret the Constitution 
in response to parliamentary inquiry.
  Mr. TRAFICANT. Does article I, section 8 of the Constitution grant 
specific powers to the Congress?
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. That is not a proper parliamentary inquiry.
  Mr. TRAFICANT. In closing, ladies and gentlemen, this is more than 
some trickery here. I want to say this to every Member in the House. We 
have delegated our authority. What we have not delegated has been 
usurped, and both sides of the aisle has allowed that to happen, and by 
not challenging this today and reversing past precedents, we in fact 
have diminished and destroyed what powers we are granted under the 
Constitution.
  Mr. OBERSTAR. Mr. Speaker, I rise to be heard on the question of 
privilege.
  Mr. Speaker, the resolution under consideration, I believe, does 
constitute a question of privileges of the House, because the trade 
laws that the Congress has enacted over the last 60 years are designed 
to ensure that American workers are not hurt by unfair and illegal 
dumping of manufactured products, including steel. Congressional intent 
as represented by the Trade and Tariff Act of 1930, is being 
specifically ignored.
  This is not a partisan matter. It is a matter that concerns Members 
on both sides of the aisle. It is not a matter limited to the present 
administration in Washington, the Clinton administration. It is an 
issue that has spread over several administrations, going back to the 
1970s, the Carter administration, later the Reagan administration, the 
Bush administration. This Congress, through our congressional steel 
caucus, on a bipartisan basis has advocated vigorous action against 
unfairly traded steel.
  I am happy to yield at this point to the chairman of the Committee on 
Transportation and Infrastructure, the gentleman from Pennsylvania.
  Mr. SHUSTER. I thank the gentleman for yielding and I rise for two 
purposes.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman cannot yield on a question of 
order but the Chair will recognize each Member separately.
  Mr. SHUSTER. I was going to ask to be able to speak out of order for 
a unanimous-consent request.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Chair will hear each Member on his own 
time, but on a question of order a Member cannot yield time.
  Mr. OBERSTAR. I thank the Chair for the ruling.

                              {time}  1300

  Shortly after the end of World War II a famous American historian and 
journalist, John Gunther, wrote:

       What makes America a great nation is the fact that it can 
     roll over 90 million tons of steel ingots a year, more than 
     Great Britain, prewar Germany, Japan, France and the Soviet 
     Union combined.

  Gunther wrote: ``This is a steel age.''
  We still live in that steel age. Steel is still the most versatile 
building material in an industrial society. We are the world's most 
efficient producer of steel. American steel industry has lost 350,000 
jobs over the last decade, has closed over 450 plants, modernized its 
facilities to the tune of $50 billion of investment. We have gone from 
10 man hours to produce a ton of steel in 1981 to 1\1/2\ to 3 hours 
depending on the type of steel today to produce a ton of steel compared 
with 4\1/2\ to 5 hours in Japan, 6\1/2\ hours in the European Union and 
10 hours in Russia. And yet steel from those countries is being sold in 
the United States at below cost of production in the country of origin, 
and this administration, like previous administrations, until prodded 
by Congress, has not acted decisively to protect our domestic industry, 
our basic building block security industry.
  We need to act. This resolution that we propose as a point of 
privilege calls on the administration to act, we ought to bring that 
resolution to the House floor before this session of Congress adjourns, 
and I urge the Chair to rule in the interests of working men and women 
of America in the steel valley, the Mon Valley of Pennsylvania-Ohio, 
and the taconite industry of northern Minnesota and northern Michigan 
and in the interest of America's standing in

[[Page H10402]]

the world community as a powerful economic force.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Calvert). The gentleman from Ohio (Mr. 
Ney).
  Mr. NEY. Mr. Speaker, I stand today to support this Visclosky 
privileged resolution which expresses the sense of the House that the 
integrity of our anti-dumping provisions of the Trade and Tariff Act of 
1930 have not been enforced.
  My colleague from Ohio (Mr. Traficant) I think has eloquently and 
adequately expressed the ability of this Congress to consider this 
privileged resolution.
  Trade laws that were enacted 60 years ago, Mr. Speaker, were designed 
to protect American workers. That is what this government did. It 
designed laws to protect American workers so they are not hurt by 
unfair trade practices.
  The U.S. steel workers and the steel industry are suffering in one of 
the worst ways in recent modern times because the Asia and Russia 
financial crisis has led those countries to illegally dump their steel 
on the market. It could not be any clearer.
  Steel that was formerly produced for domestic consumption in Asia is 
now being shipped to the United States where it is sold at prices below 
the cost of production. Steel prices have fallen 20 percent in the last 
3 months alone. The Europeans have protected itself and the steel 
industry against dumping by erecting temporary barriers on steel 
imports. So Europe has stood up for its workers; that is what Europe 
has done, Mr. Speaker. The European steel industry will weather the 
storm while the American steel industry and its workers are announcing 
new layoffs daily.
  We need to push for this resolution. We need to push the White House 
to do everything they can to stop illegal dumping practices that are 
damaging our steel industry.
  In closing, Mr. Speaker, I ask where is the Congress? Where is the 
White House? Where is the United States Government? Today we have a 
chance to answer those questions. We are here, by supporting the 
Visclosky resolution, to finally stand up for steel workers, to stand 
up for working Americans, to stand up for families in this country and 
to stand up for the United States. This is mandatory, it is a must, it 
is the right thing to do.
  Mr. Speaker, I support the Visclosky privileged resolution.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. As the Chair hears further argument, the 
Chair will reiterate the ruling of February 7, 1995.
  When a Member offers a resolution as a question of privilege pursuant 
to rule IX, the Speaker may in his discretion hear argument on whether 
the resolution constitutes a question of the privileges of the House, 
but that argument should not range to the merits of the underlying 
matter.
  The gentleman from New York.
  Mr. HINCHEY. Mr. Speaker, I would like to say a word on this 
resolution because I think the issue that is raised is critically 
important to the Members of this House and to the people of this 
country, and it is one that we ought to have a full and complete debate 
on. The reason I say that is in recognition of the statements that have 
been made just a few moments ago with regard to the impact that the 
dumping of steel is having on congressional districts and the people in 
those congressional districts, the workers in those congressional 
districts and their families across the country. This is an aggravated 
symptom of a much larger problem however.
  Mr. Speaker, we are in the midst of a global economic crisis, and one 
of the features of that global economic crisis is the propensity of 
some nations in the world suffering the effects of deflation to attempt 
to dump their products, both manufactured products and commodities, on 
to the markets of other countries. We are in a most vulnerable position 
indeed to this particular activity, and we have not done nearly enough 
to protect our economy from the effects of this kind of dumping.
  One of the things that we ought to do immediately is to petition the 
Federal Reserve to reduce interest rates substantially so that we may 
buttress our economy from the effects of this kind of dumping and the 
larger effects of the global economic crisis.
  In addition to that, we have a major issue that is currently before 
the Congress with regard to the International Monetary Fund which this 
Congress has not yet addressed. We need to increase the funding for the 
IMF, and if we were to do so, that increase in funding would make it 
less likely that resolutions of this nature would have to be brought to 
the floor.
  We are in an important issue right now. We need to decide this issue, 
bring that question of IMF funding before on the floor so that we can 
have a full and complete debate on it.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Chair would remind the Members that the 
issue before the Members is neither the advisability of the United 
States trade policy nor the actions of the administration on trade, but 
rather the procedural question of whether the resolution offered by the 
gentleman from Indiana constitutes a question of the privileges of the 
House under rule IX. The Chair would ask Members to confine their 
arguments to that issue.
  The gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Kucinich).
  Mr. KUCINICH. Mr. Speaker, I rise in favor of a privileged motion for 
H. Con. Resolution 328 which provides Congress with an opportunity to 
protect the American steel worker and the American steel industry. I am 
in concurrence with previous speakers who cited the Constitution of the 
United States with respect to Congress' ability to protect commerce in 
this country and to protect the jobs of the people whom we serve.
  Mr. Speaker, I think that we are here as a Congress to say that 
Congress needs to take action on the crisis posed by cheap subsidized 
steel imports from developing countries that are trying to earn foreign 
exchange to repay their own onerous debts. American steel is under 
siege, and we need to stand up for American steel and for American 
jobs.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman will keep his remarks to the 
issue of the parliamentary question of order.
  Mr. KUCINICH. So, therefore, I rise in favor of the privileged motion 
for H. Con. Resolution 328. I ask the Chair to grant the privileged 
motion. Otherwise I ask Members to vote for a motion to appeal a ruling 
of the Chair and vote for H. Con. Resolution 328. It is important that 
we stand up for America and stand up for American steel.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Chair will hear from one more Member, 
the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Doyle).
  Mr. DOYLE. Mr. Speaker, I rise to be heard on the question of 
privilege offered by the gentleman from Indiana. The resolution under 
consideration constitutes a question of privilege of the House because 
trade laws enacted by the House over 60 years ago are being ignored. 
These laws were specifically designed to ensure that American workers 
are not hurt by unfair and illegal dumping of manufactured products 
including steel.
  I am sorry to say that the congressional intent, as represented by 
the Trade and Tariff Act of 1930, is specifically ignored. This is an 
external crisis caused by steel dumping in the U.S. by foreign 
producers for whom any price for steel is higher than the price they 
would get at home.

                              {time}  1310

  Because of a result of the Asian and Russian financial crisis, there 
is no market for steel in their home countries. This is a crisis 
addressable by laws currently in effect which are not being enforced.
  U.S. steel remains very competitive. But steel was being dumped in 
the U.S. at below the cost of production, which is illegal and a 
violation of the laws that the Legislative Branch has enacted. U.S. 
trade laws are supposed to be enforced by the Executive Branch. The 
administration has failed to stop these illegal activities, and the 
dignity of this House is being impugned. I urge the support of the 
resolution.
  Mr. WELLER. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to bring attention to a matter 
of the utmost importance to the future of the American steel industry 
and to thousands of steelworkers around the country, many of which I 
represent in the 11th Congressional District in Chicago's south 
suburbs.
  Mr. Speaker, the American steel market is in the midst of a crisis 
due to a unprecedented flow of below market value foreign steel. The 
economic problems in Russia, Asia and Latin

[[Page H10403]]

America have led to large scale dumping of foreign steel on the U.S. 
market with most of this steel being sold at below the price of 
production in their home markets. As you know Mr. Speaker, this is an 
unfair and illegal trade practice under both international and U.S. 
trade policies, and the dumping of foreign steel threatens many good 
paying American jobs.
  This past spring, I along with 64 other members of this House signed 
a letter to the President asking him to enforce existing U.S. laws 
against these unfairly traded steel imports. Unfortunately Mr. Speaker, 
the Administration has failed to act on behalf of the steel industry 
and American workers. In fact, the problem has only grown worse since 
this spring. Steel imports for this past July were up almost 45% over 
July 1997. Imports from Japan and South Korea are up over 113% and 89% 
respectively.
  The impact of this dumped steel has already resulted in layoffs and 
reduced orders in factories around the country. U.S. Steel has laid off 
over 100 workers in Pittsburgh and is planning to lay off more workers 
as orders continue to slow. Geneva Steel has had to let go of over 500 
employees, and Northwestern Steel and Wire Company in my state of 
Illinois has said that it might have to let go as many as 450 workers 
because of the these unfair trade practices. Even Acme Steel Company in 
Chicago has been forced to file for bankruptcy protection putting even 
more jobs in question.
  I have over 20 firms in my district that produce steel or steel 
products. Some of these firms are large cooperations like Birmingham 
Steel whose mill in Joliet, Illinois employs almost 400 people, while 
others are small family owned businesses like Bellson Scrap and Steel 
in Bourbonnais. Without immediate action to stem the tide of this 
unfairly dumped steel, I fear that these steel producers and their 
workers will face severe harm.
  Mr. Speaker, both the steel industry and the steelworkers union have 
filed suit to stop these unfair practices, but, without swift action by 
the Administration to stop this unchecked flow of dumped steel, it may 
be too late for many of our steel companies and steel workers to wait 
for the courts resolution.
  The steel industry has rebounded from the financial difficulties of 
the 1980's that cost our country over 325,000 jobs. The American steel 
industry once in decline, now produces the lowest cost and highest 
quality steel on the planet. If we fail to ensure that American steel 
plays on a level playing field with the rest of the world, than we 
place American steel companies and American workers including the 400 
at Birmingham Steel in great harm.

                [From the Chicago Tribune, Oct. 1, 1998]

    Steel Firms File Trade Complaint--Targets: Brazil, Japan, Russia

                           (By Michael Arndt)

       Battered by imported steel arriving by the shipload, a 
     coalition of domestic steel companies Wednesday asked the 
     government to slap hefty duties on steel sheet--one of the 
     industry's most widely used products--from Brazil, Japan and 
     Russia.
       The coalition also warned it would file unfair trade 
     complaints against other steel goods from the same three 
     teetering nations and others, including possibly South Korea, 
     in what is shaping up to be the biggest counteroffensive 
     against imports of any kind in at least a decade.
       Before it's over, the Clinton administration may intervene 
     and negotiate trade pacts that would give these nations a 
     limited slice of the U.S. market, avoiding a cutoff that 
     could hurt foreign governments important to U.S. interests.
       The complaint, filed with the U.S. International Trade 
     Commission and the Commerce Department, followed a record 
     surge in low-priced imports that have smashed through mill 
     towns this summer and fall like a Category 5 hurricane.
       Already, Acme Metals Inc. of south suburban Riverdale has 
     sought bankruptcy protection while J&L Specialty Steel Inc. 
     has shelved plans for a new mill because prices and orders 
     are skidding. Others have idled production lines, trimmed 
     work-weeks and furloughed or fired hundreds of employees.
       And layoffs, limited thus far by terms of the United 
     Steelworkers of America's master labor contract, could 
     balloon to the thousands by year's end if the flow of imports 
     is not quickly dammed.
       ``We are in an absolute crisis,'' Paul Wilhelm, chief 
     executive of USX Corp.'s U.S. Steel Group, said in a 
     teleconference. ``In my 35 years in the business, I have 
     never seen the unprecedented levels of imports or the 
     cutthroat prices coming into this country.''
       To people who have peripherally followed the steel 
     industry, Wilhelm and the other CEOs in the Stand Up for 
     Steel coalition sound like men crying wolf. Since 1980, when 
     the nation's current trade laws went into effect, steelmakers 
     have filed more complaints than every other industry 
     combined.
       But the increase in imports and tandem decline in spot-
     market prices triggered by Asia's economic collapse have been 
     extraordinarily steep, suggesting that the steel industry--
     still a bedrock even in an Information Age economy--is truly 
     in as much trouble as these men claim.
       Indeed, only hours after the coalition announced its trade 
     complaint in a Washington news conference, analyst Michelle 
     Applebaum of Salomon Smith Barney urged investors to sell 
     steel stocks, figuring that it may take until late 1999 for 
     the trade complaint to lift overall prices.
       The industry's latest bugbear is imported hot-rolled steel 
     sheet, a commodity used in a variety of manufactured 
     products, including vehicle parts, appliances and office 
     furniture.
       In their unfair trade complaint, the coalition notes that 
     imports of this steel from Brazil, Japan and Russia jumped 81 
     percent in the first seven months of 1998 from the year-
     earlier period, giving them 27 percent of this market 
     segment, up from 10.9 percent in 1997.
       Looking over a longer timeframe, the coalition says that 
     hot-rolled steel imports from the three nations are currently 
     running at six times their 1995 annual total.
       The price of these products is also unfairly low, according 
     to the coalition. Under U.S. trade law, it is illegal to sell 
     imported steel here for lower prices than in the foreign 
     producer's home market or for less than the cost of 
     production--practices known colloquially and legally as 
     dumping.
       To make these goods fairly priced, the coalition is 
     demanding duties that would boost import prices from Brazil 
     by 31 percent to 91 percent; from Japan by 28 percent to 85 
     percent; and from Russia by 91 percent to 167 percent.
       The 12-company coalition--led by U.S. Steel, Bethlehem 
     Steel Corp. and LTV Corp.--also accuses the Brazilian 
     government of subsidizing its steel exports, another 
     violation of U.S. trade law.
       The trade complaint goes first to the International Trade 
     Commission, which is scheduled to rule preliminary by mid-
     November whether the imports have injured the domestic 
     industry. If so, the Commerce Department could set tentative 
     duties by late April.
       Well before then, however, coalition members said they plan 
     to file unfair trade complaints against so-called emerging-
     market nations in Asia, Latin America and the former Soviet 
     bloc on other widely traded products, such as high quality 
     cold-rolled sheet, heavy-duty plate and multipurpose coils.
       In the next few months, ``we will be meeting with you many 
     more times'' as more complaints are brought, Curtis Barnette, 
     chairman and chief executive of Bethlehem Steel, promised 
     reporters. The coalition, he added, will go after ``all 
     products and all countries that are trading unfairly. No one 
     is excluded.''
       There is almost a sense of tragedy in the steel industry's 
     current troubles. Since 1980, the industry has spent an 
     estimated $50 billion on more-productive equipment and mills 
     to bring itself up to world standards. Some 325,000 jobs were 
     eliminated in the process.
       But just as the industry seemed finally to have put its 
     house in order, Asia's economies came apart. With few 
     consumers in their home markets, manufacturers in these 
     nations turned toward exports to keep their factories busy 
     and avoid layoffs that could be politically disruptive.
       Steel executives and workers said they feel cheated.
       Over the last 12 years, for instance, investors spent $420 
     million on Geneva Steel Inc., which enabled the Provo, Utah-
     based company to survive while every other traditional steel 
     mill west of the Mississippi River went under.
       Now, Geneva Steel has fired 270 employees and put another 
     335 on temporary layoff because of falling orders.
       ``Years and years of work will go down the drain very 
     quickly if something does not happen,'' said Robert Grow, its 
     president.
       Other steelmakers are cutting back as well. Nucor Corp. has 
     slowed production at three mills, including one in 
     Crawfordsville, Ind. U.S. Steel has shut a blast furnace at 
     its Gary Works that accounts for 7.5 percent of its total 
     iron output, and has laid off about 100 workers in 
     Pennsylvania.
       And Northwestern Steel and Wire Co. of Sterling, Ill., 
     recently said it would fire 450 workers as it exits nearly 
     half its wire-products lines, in part because of heightened 
     competition from low-priced imports.
       ``This is a not a regional problem,'' said George Becker, 
     president of the United Steelworkers union, which joined in 
     the trade complaint. ``This is happening all over the United 
     States, from Provo to Alabama, in Pennsylvania and south of 
     Chicago.''
  Mr. LIPINSKI. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support of this 
privileged resolution.
  For far too long, this Administration has turned its back on American 
workers. The Administration's failed trade policies has failed American 
workers. Free trade at any cost? I don't think so especially when 
American workers are the ones who suffer.
  The current international economic crises has hit our steel industry 
hard. Asian nations such as Taiwan, China, Indonesia, Thailand, 
Malaysia, Korea and Japan have been illegally dumping their steel in 
our market. In the five months of 1998, U.S. steel imports from those 
Asian nations have increased by 79 percent from the same period from 
1997. Compare that with the European Union which, despite being a major 
economy, only imported one-tenth as

[[Page H10404]]

much finished steel products from Asia as the U.S. did.
  And what is the difference between the European Union and the U.S.? 
The difference is the European Union enforces their trade laws--the 
U.S. doesn't.
  Mr. Speaker, this body passed tough trade laws that level the playing 
field as we compete in the global economy, but these trade laws only 
work if they are enforced. And right now, under this Administration, 
they aren't.
  I strongly urge the Administration to fully utilize U.S. trade laws 
to protect our domestic steel industry. When foreign nations dump steel 
at below-market prices in the U.S., it is unfair. When the 
Administration, charged with enforcing out trade laws and the 
responsibility of protecting American jobs and American industry from 
inequitable, foreign competition fails to do so, it is unfair. This 
worsens the U.S. trade deficit, exports American jobs, and causes a 
contractionary effect on U.S. economic growth. It is wrong for American 
workers to bear the burden of this nation's failed trade policies.
  I urge all of my colleagues to join me in support of this resolution.
  Mr. ENGLISH of Pennsylvania. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to express my 
views on the ruling of the Chair on the question of whether this is in 
fact a ``Privileged Resolution'' under the rules of this House.
  I support the ruling of the Chair. I do not believe that this is in 
fact a privileged resolution under the rules of the House. I do believe 
that this issue should be brought up under regular order. I fully 
support the underlying resolution, H. Con. Res. 328, of which I am an 
original cosponsor. I urge the House of Representatives to call up and 
pass this important legislation under its regular order of business.
  I call on the President and the Administration to act expeditiously 
to eliminate the damage being caused by illegal dumping of foreign 
steel products in America. Russia, Brazil, Korea, China, and Japan 
should not be allowed to export their economic mismanagement to the 
United States. Dumping is an unfair, intolerable and illegal trade 
practice that is hurting American steel companies and puts American 
jobs at risk.
  Due to economic crises, Korean, Japanese, Russian, and other foreign 
steel companies cannot sell their products domestically. In order to 
liquidate their inventory, foreign steel producers are ``dumping'' 
their products in the U.S. by selling at prices below production cost 
in their home and U.S. markets. Steel imports in May 1998 increased a 
staggering 28.5 percent from last year.
  Over the last decade, U.S. steel has revitalized to become one of the 
most competitive industries in the world. This enormous accomplishment 
is now in jeopardy due to illegal traded steel imports.
  H. Con. Res. 328 is valuable legislation that calls on the 
Administration to act and respond to the surge of unfairly traded steel 
imports resulting from the financial crises in Asia, Russia and other 
parts of the world. It is an important step in addressing the growing 
steel import crisis and should be brought up and passed by the House.
  An economic crisis in Russia and Asia does not give these countries 
the right to violate trade laws. Congress and the Administration need 
to act now to enforce trade laws and stop an economic crisis in the 
U.S. steel industry. We need a level playing field for everyone who 
participates in the global marketplace.
  I support the underlying resolution, but Mr. Speaker I am compelled 
on procedural grounds to oppose the motion of the Gentleman from 
Indiana. By invoking this procedure, the Gentleman has unnecessarily 
politicized what should be a consensus issue in this House.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Calvert). The Chair is prepared to rule 
on whether the resolution offered by the gentleman from Indiana (Mr. 
Visclosky) presents a question of the privileges of the House under 
rule IX.
  The resolution offered by the gentleman from Indiana calls upon the 
President to address a trade imbalance in the area of steel imports. 
Specifically, the resolution calls upon the President to pursue 
enhanced enforcement of trade laws, to establish a task force on 
monitoring imports, and to submit a report to Congress by the date 
certain on that matter.
  A resolution expressing the legislative sentiment that the President 
should take specified action to achieve desired public policy end does 
not present the question affecting the rights of the House, 
collectively, its safety, dignity, or integrity of its proceedings as 
required under rule IX.
  In the opinion of the Chair, the resolution offered by the gentleman 
from Indiana is purely a legislative proposition, properly initiated 
through the introduction in the hopper under clause 4 of rule 22.
  The Chair will note a recent relevant precedent on this point. On 
February 7, 1995, Speaker Gingrich ruled, consistent with the landmark 
ruling of May 6, 1921 by Speaker Gillett, that a resolution invoking 
the legislative powers enumerated in the Constitution and requiring a 
multifaceted evaluation and report by the Comptroller General on the 
proposed support of the Mexican pesos did not constitute the question 
of the privileges of the House.
  In his ruling, Speaker Gingrich stated: ``Were the Chair to rule 
otherwise, then any alleged infringement by the Executive Branch, even, 
for example, through the regulatory process conferred on Congress by 
the Constitution would give rise to a question of the privileges of the 
House.''
  Although constitutional prerogatives have not been invoked in the 
text of the resolution before us today, the principle put forth in the 
1995 ruling is nevertheless pertinent, as evidenced by the debate on 
this question. To permit a question of the privileges of the House 
addressing presidential trade policy through the mere invocation of the 
Constitution would permit any Member to advance virtually any 
legislative proposal as a question of the privileges of the House.
  Accordingly, the resolution offered by the gentleman from Indiana 
does not request constitute a question of the privileges of the House 
under rule IX and may not be considered at this time.


                         Parliamentary Inquiry

  Mr. TRAFICANT. Mr. Speaker, parliamentary inquiry.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman may state his parliamentary 
inquiry.
  Mr. TRAFICANT. Mr. Speaker, I do not mean to belabor the House.
  My question is, the ruling of the Chair is only enforced by an 
affirmative vote to sustain the Chair's ruling. If the House votes to 
overturn the tabling of this, does it not set precedent to give back to 
the House that which exists within its mandated constitutional 
authority? If we vote in deference to the Chair's ruling, does it not 
allow us to thus change precedence, change the rules of the House, and 
allow debate on such issues?
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The ruling of the Chair is subject to appeal 
and could be overturned.
  Mr. TRAFICANT. Mr. Speaker, question. If it is overturned, the ruling 
of the Chair then would allow these issues of privilege to exist for 
constitutional powers granted to the Congress.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Chair cannot anticipate the precedential 
effect of a future action. If the appeal were taken and the Chair was 
overruled, the resolution would be pending.
  Mr. TRAFICANT. I thank the Chair.
  Mr. VISCLOSKY. Mr. Speaker, I appeal the ruling of the Chair.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is: Shall the decision of the 
Chair stand as the judgment of the House?


            Motion To Table Offered By Mr. Davis of Virginia

  Mr. DAVIS of Virginia. Mr. Speaker, I move to lay the appeal on the 
table.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the motion offered by the 
gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Davis) to lay on the table the appeal of 
the ruling of the Chair.
  The question was taken; and the Speaker pro tempore announced that 
the ayes appeared to have it.
  Mr. VISCLOSKY. Mr. Speaker, I object to the vote on the ground that a 
quorum is not present and make the point of order that a quorum is not 
present.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Evidently a quorum is not present.
  The Sergeant at Arms will notify absent Members.

[[Page H10405]]

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. This 15-minute vote on tabling the appeal 
will be followed by votes on the four questions postponed earlier 
today.
  Without objection, each postponed vote will be conducted as a 5-
minute vote.
  There was no objection.
  The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--yeas 219, 
nays 204, not voting 11, as follows:

                             [Roll No. 512]

                               YEAS--219

     Aderholt
     Archer
     Armey
     Bachus
     Baker
     Ballenger
     Barr
     Barrett (NE)
     Bartlett
     Barton
     Bass
     Bateman
     Bereuter
     Bilbray
     Bilirakis
     Bliley
     Blunt
     Boehlert
     Boehner
     Bonilla
     Bono
     Brady (TX)
     Bryant
     Bunning
     Burr
     Burton
     Buyer
     Callahan
     Calvert
     Camp
     Campbell
     Canady
     Cannon
     Castle
     Chabot
     Chambliss
     Chenoweth
     Christensen
     Coble
     Coburn
     Combest
     Cook
     Cooksey
     Cox
     Crane
     Crapo
     Cubin
     Cunningham
     Davis (VA)
     Deal
     DeLay
     Diaz-Balart
     Dickey
     Doolittle
     Dreier
     Duncan
     Dunn
     Ehlers
     Ehrlich
     Emerson
     English
     Ensign
     Everett
     Ewing
     Fawell
     Foley
     Forbes
     Fossella
     Fowler
     Fox
     Franks (NJ)
     Frelinghuysen
     Gallegly
     Ganske
     Gekas
     Gibbons
     Gilchrest
     Gillmor
     Gilman
     Goodlatte
     Goodling
     Goss
     Graham
     Granger
     Greenwood
     Gutknecht
     Hansen
     Hastert
     Hastings (WA)
     Hayworth
     Hefley
     Herger
     Hill
     Hilleary
     Hobson
     Hoekstra
     Hostettler
     Houghton
     Hulshof
     Hunter
     Hutchinson
     Hyde
     Inglis
     Istook
     Jenkins
     Johnson (CT)
     Johnson, Sam
     Jones
     Kasich
     Kelly
     Kim
     King (NY)
     Kingston
     Klug
     Knollenberg
     Kolbe
     LaHood
     Largent
     Latham
     LaTourette
     Leach
     Lewis (CA)
     Lewis (KY)
     Linder
     Livingston
     LoBiondo
     Lucas
     Manzullo
     McCollum
     McCrery
     McDade
     McHugh
     McInnis
     McIntosh
     McKeon
     Mica
     Miller (FL)
     Moran (KS)
     Morella
     Myrick
     Northup
     Norwood
     Nussle
     Oxley
     Packard
     Pappas
     Paul
     Paxon
     Pease
     Peterson (PA)
     Petri
     Pickering
     Pitts
     Pombo
     Porter
     Portman
     Quinn
     Radanovich
     Ramstad
     Redmond
     Regula
     Riggs
     Riley
     Rogan
     Rogers
     Rohrabacher
     Ros-Lehtinen
     Roukema
     Royce
     Ryun
     Salmon
     Sanford
     Saxton
     Scarborough
     Schaefer, Dan
     Schaffer, Bob
     Sensenbrenner
     Sessions
     Shadegg
     Shaw
     Shays
     Shimkus
     Shuster
     Skaggs
     Skeen
     Smith (MI)
     Smith (NJ)
     Smith (OR)
     Smith (TX)
     Smith, Linda
     Snowbarger
     Solomon
     Souder
     Spence
     Stearns
     Stump
     Sununu
     Talent
     Tauzin
     Taylor (NC)
     Thomas
     Thornberry
     Thune
     Tiahrt
     Upton
     Walsh
     Wamp
     Watkins
     Watts (OK)
     Weldon (FL)
     Weldon (PA)
     Weller
     White
     Whitfield
     Wicker
     Wilson
     Wolf
     Young (AK)
     Young (FL)

                               NAYS--204

     Abercrombie
     Ackerman
     Allen
     Andrews
     Baesler
     Baldacci
     Barcia
     Barrett (WI)
     Becerra
     Bentsen
     Berry
     Bishop
     Blagojevich
     Blumenauer
     Bonior
     Borski
     Boswell
     Boyd
     Brady (PA)
     Brown (CA)
     Brown (FL)
     Brown (OH)
     Capps
     Cardin
     Carson
     Clay
     Clayton
     Clement
     Clyburn
     Condit
     Conyers
     Costello
     Coyne
     Cramer
     Cummings
     Danner
     Davis (FL)
     Davis (IL)
     DeFazio
     DeGette
     Delahunt
     DeLauro
     Deutsch
     Dicks
     Dingell
     Dixon
     Doggett
     Dooley
     Doyle
     Edwards
     Engel
     Eshoo
     Etheridge
     Evans
     Farr
     Fattah
     Fazio
     Filner
     Ford
     Frank (MA)
     Frost
     Furse
     Gejdenson
     Gephardt
     Gonzalez
     Goode
     Gordon
     Green
     Gutierrez
     Hall (OH)
     Hall (TX)
     Hamilton
     Harman
     Hastings (FL)
     Hilliard
     Hinchey
     Hinojosa
     Holden
     Hooley
     Horn
     Hoyer
     Jackson (IL)
     Jackson-Lee (TX)
     Jefferson
     John
     Johnson (WI)
     Johnson, E.B.
     Kanjorski
     Kaptur
     Kennedy (MA)
     Kennedy (RI)
     Kildee
     Kilpatrick
     Kind (WI)
     Kleczka
     Klink
     Kucinich
     LaFalce
     Lampson
     Lantos
     Lee
     Levin
     Lewis (GA)
     Lipinski
     Lofgren
     Lowey
     Luther
     Maloney (CT)
     Maloney (NY)
     Manton
     Markey
     Martinez
     Mascara
     Matsui
     McCarthy (MO)
     McCarthy (NY)
     McDermott
     McGovern
     McHale
     McIntyre
     McKinney
     McNulty
     Meehan
     Meek (FL)
     Meeks (NY)
     Menendez
     Metcalf
     Millender-McDonald
     Miller (CA)
     Minge
     Mink
     Moakley
     Mollohan
     Moran (VA)
     Murtha
     Nadler
     Neal
     Neumann
     Ney
     Oberstar
     Obey
     Olver
     Ortiz
     Owens
     Pallone
     Pascrell
     Pastor
     Payne
     Pelosi
     Peterson (MN)
     Pickett
     Pomeroy
     Price (NC)
     Rahall
     Reyes
     Rivers
     Rodriguez
     Roemer
     Rothman
     Roybal-Allard
     Rush
     Sabo
     Sanchez
     Sanders
     Sandlin
     Sawyer
     Schumer
     Scott
     Serrano
     Sherman
     Sisisky
     Skelton
     Slaughter
     Smith, Adam
     Snyder
     Spratt
     Stabenow
     Stark
     Stenholm
     Stokes
     Strickland
     Stupak
     Tanner
     Tauscher
     Taylor (MS)
     Thompson
     Thurman
     Tierney
     Torres
     Towns
     Traficant
     Turner
     Velazquez
     Vento
     Visclosky
     Waters
     Watt (NC)
     Waxman
     Wexler
     Weygand
     Wise
     Woolsey
     Wynn
     Yates

                             NOT VOTING--11

     Berman
     Boucher
     Collins
     Hefner
     Kennelly
     Lazio
     Nethercutt
     Parker
     Poshard
     Pryce (OH)
     Rangel

                              {time}  1345

  Ms. RIVERS and Mr. GILMAN changed their vote from ``yea'' to ``nay.''
  Messrs. LEWIS of California, LARGENT, KIM, WELDON, PITTS, LaTOURETTE, 
ADERHOLT, BILIRAKIS, GILMAN, BUYER and Mrs. LINDA SMITH of Washington 
changed their vote from ``nay'' to ``yea.''

                              {time}  1350

  So the motion to table the appeal of the ruling of the Chair was 
agreed to.
  The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
  A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.

                          ____________________