[Congressional Record Volume 148, Number 23 (Wednesday, March 6, 2002)]
[House]
[Pages H719-H720]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




         PRESIDENT BUSH STANDS TALL FOR DOMESTIC STEEL INDUSTRY

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under a previous order of the House, the 
gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. English) is recognized for 5 minutes.
  Mr. ENGLISH. Mr. Speaker, allow me to take a moment to applaud 
President Bush for standing tall in favor of our domestic steel 
industry. He has, at a very critical moment, stood up for steel. If we 
have a domestic steel industry in coming decades, I believe it will be 
because of this courageous action and an administration that was 
willing to listen to steelworkers, listen to steel producers, and also 
listen to all other interested parties in order to craft a creative 
policy. He clearly listened to those who were calling for substantial 
relief for an industry in crisis. It has been running the risk of being 
hollowed out by unfair trade practices.
  It is obvious that the President carefully weighed the issue. His 
judicious decision will provide breathing space to the domestic 
steelworkers and the industry. Enacting tariffs of up to 30 percent for 
most steel products provides help for those hardest hit by unfavorable 
conditions in the steel market. This administration has stepped up to 
the plate for the American steel industry and its workers, something 
that previous administrations, regrettably, had been unwilling to do.
  Without the concrete actions taken by this President, the industry 
was facing a meltdown. The President recognized that the American steel 
industry and its workers have done their part in recent years. This is 
something that critics do not really willingly acknowledge, but the 
fact is our steel producers have taken dramatic steps to reduce 
inefficient capacity and modernize operations to become among the most 
productive steel producers in the world, with as few as one-and-a-half 
man hours needed per ton of steel produced.

                              {time}  1515

  That is an extraordinary transformation of an industry that was very 
inefficient a few decades ago.
  To achieve these advances in productivity, the U.S. steel industry 
reduced capacity by more than 23 million tons, closed numerous 
inefficient mills, and significantly cut jobs. The workers have endured 
their fair share of pain and suffering as the workforce was reduced by 
hundreds of thousands of workers in an effort to become the most 
efficient producers of steel. But we all know that when competing with 
the unfair trading practices of some of our competitors, it was simply 
not enough.
  Let us understand, Mr. Speaker, what the President did was WTO 
compatible. It was based on remedies approved by the International 
Trade Commission, and it utilized our 201 process, which the WTO 
contemplated. While opponents of this 201 action are crying foul, 
saying the cost will be prohibitive, Mr.

[[Page H720]]

Speaker, allow me to assure Members that their arguments are without 
substance.
  According to a study by Professor Jerry Hausman, an economist at MIT, 
the assumptions from opponents such as the Consuming Industry's Trade 
Action Council were fundamentally flawed. Hausman's study, which unlike 
the CITAC study so often quoted in the media, accurately reflected the 
current steel market, showed the tariffs would cost the average 
consumer about $2 a year and have no negative impact on the U.S. 
economy. This was a study of stronger remedies than were actually 
proposed by the International Trade Commission. Hausman's study showed 
that the section 201 remedies would provide a net benefit of $9 billion 
a year to the U.S. economy. Steel constitutes only a small share of the 
total cost of most products that contain steel, so the cost to the 
consumer and the costs on a single consumer item would be minimal.
  For a typical family car, the increase caused by the imposition of a 
40 percent tariff would be about $60, a 30 percent tariff in the tariff 
structure proposed by the President would be substantially less. For a 
refrigerator, the increase would be less than $3.
  Again, I have to congratulate the President for being engaged on 
these issues, looking past the cannot at the substance, and being 
concerned about many of the communities we have in places like western 
Pennsylvania, Ohio, and West Virginia where people have built a living 
and built living wages around a steel industry that we need to have in 
this country for strategic reasons, and if we are going to maintain our 
industrial base.
  Mr. Speaker, this administration has had the courage to take on this 
tough issue. We need to do more in Congress. We need to look at the 
issue of legacy costs. We need to look at ways potentially of 
participating in a global effort to rationalize the industry; but in 
the end, we can build on this 201 decision, we can build on the 
President's courage, and working with the administration, we have an 
opportunity to lay the groundwork for a strong, healthy competitive 
world-class American steel industry that is allowed to compete on a 
level playing field.

                          ____________________