[Congressional Record Volume 148, Number 59 (Friday, May 10, 2002)]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Pages E761-E762]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]


PROVIDING FOR DISPOSITION OF H.J. RES 84, DISAPPROVING THE ACTION TAKEN 
BY THE PRESIDENT UNDER SECTION 203 OF THE TRADE ACT OF 1974 TRANSMITTED 
                    TO THE CONGRESS ON MARCH 5, 2002

                                 ______
                                 

                               speech of

                         HON. MICHAEL N. CASTLE

                              of delaware

                    in the house of representatives

                         Wednesday, May 8, 2002

  Mr. CASTLE. Madam Speaker, I rise today in strong support of House 
Joint Resolution 84, disapproving of the President's actions to impose 
higher tariffs on imported steel products than those recommended by the 
International Trade Commission, and against the accompanying rule. 
First, Madam Speaker, let me state in regards to the rule, I feel it is 
important that this chamber have a full and vigorous debate on the 
impact of the steel tariffs imposed by the President. This rule is 
creatively slanted in favor of protectionism and against free and fair 
trade.
  The tariffs, implemented by President Bush on March 5, are a well 
intentioned, but misguided effort to help the domestic steel industry. 
Although I agree the steel industry needs to be supported and reformed, 
protecting it from global competition, which is the essence of free 
trade, is not the answer. The industries that transport steel and those 
industries that need steel to make their products in the U.S. have 
begun to feel the brunt of these protectionist measures. Recent 
estimates reveal that the restrictions could cost as many as 74,500 
jobs in steel consuming industries in order to protect 8,900 steel 
jobs. In addition, protecting these steel jobs will do nothing to 
address the needs of the thousands of retired steel workers concerned 
about their retirement security. Ironically, tax revenue from the jobs 
in steel transportation and those industries which purchase steel could 
have been used to provide a solution to these other problems.
  The Port of Wilmington, in the State of Delaware, imported 57 percent 
less steel in 2001 than in 2000 due to federal government steel 
safeguards--which caused a decrease of

[[Page E762]]

53,000 work hours at the Port. The economic benefits provided by the 
steel consuming industries and our nation's ports cannot be forgotten 
in this debate. For example, the Delaware River region generated $70 
million in total tax dollars for the State and Federal government in 
2001. It is evident that the ITC's tariff recommendations would cost 
far fewer American jobs in the manufacturing, shipping and port 
industries.
  Furthermore, since the President's decision, our trade partners have 
begun to retaliate, which could further hurt the U.S. economy. 
Immediately following the decision, the Russian Government instituted a 
ban on the importation of U.S. poultry, which adversely affected the 
poultry industry in Delaware and throughout the nation. Other nations 
are also announcing retaliatory actions and filing complaints with the 
World Trade Organization. For example, the European Union has announced 
a broad range of possible tariffs on U.S. products, some as high as 100 
percent, that would affect countless U.S. industries, including citrus 
and textiles.
  I recognize the need to support our domestic steel workers, but these 
measures must be done in a fair and balanced manner that generates U.S. 
jobs and spurs the national economy--not in a manner that adversely 
impacts these two fundamental principles and favors protectionism. 
Today, I rise in strong support of free and fair trade and the role of 
the United States in the global economy. At a minimum, I encourage my 
colleagues to vote against the rule in order to allow a full and fair 
debate on this legislation to overturn the President's decision. And I 
hope my colleagues will join me in supporting H.J. Res. 84.

                          ____________________