[Congressional Record Volume 145, Number 142 (Tuesday, October 19, 1999)]
[House]
[Page H10183]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                   WTO MINISTERIAL MEETING IN SEATTLE

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under the Speaker's announced policy of 
January 19, 1999, the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Regula) is recognized 
during morning hour debates for 5 minutes.
  Mr. REGULA. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to express concerns about the 
upcoming World Trade Organization ministerial meeting which will be 
hosted by the United States in Seattle, Washington, from November 30 
until December 3.
  The purpose of this meeting is to prepare an agenda for a new round 
of multilateral trade negotiations aimed at expanding and liberalizing 
world trade in the wake of the Uruguay Round of negotiations which 
ended in 1994.
  As Chairman of the Congressional Steel Caucus, I recently convened 
two days of briefings by U.S. steel industry executives and the 
President of the Steelworkers of America. In addition to discussing the 
continued threat of low-priced imports, the industry and steelworker 
representatives also provided the caucus with advice on what should and 
should not be included in the agenda which is being drafted in Seattle.
  There is general support for this new round of negotiations because 
liberalized trade has a great potential benefit for the U.S. economy as 
long as that liberalized trade is fair, and I emphasize the word 
``fair,'' is rules-based and is market economy based. The caucus heard 
that any future negotiations under the auspices of the World Trade 
Organization must in no way weaken U.S. trade laws, particularly our 
antidumping and countervailing duty laws. These laws provide essential 
remedies against unfair foreign imports.
  Mr. Speaker, I am pleased that we have been repeatedly assured by 
Ambassador Barshefsky, Secretary Daley and other administration 
officials that antidumping and countervailing duty statutes will not be 
reopened in Seattle or in any new round of negotiations to follow. But 
we have also heard repeatedly from several of our trading partners that 
they will seek to reopen discussions on these laws.
  My particular concern arises from an addendum to the WTO General 
Council Chairman Mchumo's draft Ministerial Declaration for the Seattle 
meeting which he drafted ``on his own responsibility.'' The proposals 
in this addendum would seriously weaken the U.S. antidumping and 
countervailing duty laws as they stand today. Although this addendum is 
not official, it indicates that there will be substantial pressure on 
the U.S. delegation to include discussions of changes to the 
antidumping and countervailing duty laws in the new round of 
negotiations.
  The proposed changes would allow the dumping of goods into the United 
States and would allow goods to be subsidized by foreign governments. 
These changes in turn would jeopardize United States jobs. I will 
mention just a few of the 24 changes that have been proposed in the 
Mchumo addendum.
  One, once an antidumping investigation under U.S. law is concluded, 
no new petition involving the same product could be initiated for at 
least a year. This means dumping of that product could resume and 
continue for a year before any remedy could be pursued.
  Two, if a penalty duty lower than the calculated margin of dumping 
were thought to be sufficient to reduce the injury, then that lower 
duty would be mandatory, even if dumping continues.
  Three, countervailing duties would be imposed not in the full amount 
but only in the amount by which the subsidy exceeds the applicable de 
minimis level.
  Four, developing countries would suddenly be exempted altogether from 
the present prohibition on export subsidies and import substitution 
subsidies.
  Mr. Speaker, these proposed changes sound technical, but they would 
have a dramatic impact on U.S. jobs in the manufacturing sector and in 
other important sensitive sectors. These changes would mean job losses 
for many Americans and, therefore, these changes must be resisted.
  I support the Visclosky-Ney resolution stating that the antidumping 
and antisubsidies code of the WTO should not be reopened in Seattle. I 
will be part of a delegation travelling to Seattle in November as part 
of the Speaker's advisory group on the WTO ministerial. A strong vote 
in the House and participation by Members in the delegation to Seattle 
will be essential in backing up, and I say that supporting, the 
administration's position that the U.S. antidumping and countervailing 
duty laws should not be weakened in any way during the upcoming 
multilateral trade negotiations.

                          ____________________