[Congressional Record Volume 152, Number 135 (Friday, December 8, 2006)]
[Senate]
[Pages S11721-S11722]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
APPAREL IMPORTS
Mrs. FEINSTEIN. Mr. President, I rise today to discuss the assurances
my friend and colleague from Oregon and I have received from U.S. Trade
Representative, USTR, Susan Schwab and Assistant Secretary of Commerce
David Spooner about the import monitoring program on Vietnamese
textiles and apparel. In response to concerns raised by Senator Dole
and Senator Graham about the impact of Permanent Normal Trade
Relations, PNTR, for Vietnam, Ambassador Schwab and Secretary of
Commerce Carlos Gutierrez wrote a letter stating their intention to
monitor U.S. textile and apparel imports from Vietnam and self-initiate
antidumping investigations if the normal elements of an antidumping
case can be demonstrated. The Commerce Department will conduct a review
every 6 months, and the program will last until the end of this
administration. I ask the Senator from Oregon if he is aware of the
concerns that have been raised about this program.
Mr. SMITH. I am aware of the concerns, and I want to thank the senior
Senator from California for her leadership on this issue. The apparel
industry is a very important segment of Oregon's economy, and my
constituents back home are watching this issue very closely. There is a
great deal at stake here for Oregon companies such as Nike, Inc., and
Columbia Sportswear that source apparel from Vietnam. These companies
provide thousands of well-paying jobs to workers in my State and infuse
billions of dollars into Oregon's economy. I have heard from them and
other U.S. retailers about the impact the proposed monitoring program
will have on their businesses as unilateral actions such as this can
have a significant chilling effect on companies' sourcing strategies.
Unfortunately, the administration did not give the apparel and retail
industry due consideration in its decision to monitor textile and
apparel products from Vietnam. I am disappointed that the
administration chose to use our trade remedy laws as a tool in the
legislative process and not consult with other Members of Congress or
the retail industry before agreeing to create a new monitoring process.
I share the concerns of my constituents that this program will burden
and discriminate against trade in textiles and apparel from Vietnam.
I was pleased that the senior Senator from California agreed to send
a letter with me to USTR and Commerce asking for assurances that the
program would be implemented in a manner fully consistent with U.S. law
and our obligations in the World Trade Organization, WTO, and that no
new precedent would be set; the program would not establish any
additional burdens for importers and exporters of Vietnamese textiles
and apparel; and U.S. textile and apparel importers and retailers will
have the opportunity to review and comment on how the program is
developed.
[[Page S11722]]
Mrs. FEINSTEIN. I agree with the Senator from Oregon's description of
our concerns and the assurances we are seeking from the administration.
This matter was first brought to my attention by key retail
constituents in my State including companies like Gap, Inc., Liz
Claiborne, and Limited Brands. Retailers have expressed their concern
that the import monitoring program would create too much
unpredictability and force companies to modify their sourcing
strategies and accept the risk of and potential additional cost of
antidumping investigations and antidumping duties. They share the
concern expressed by the Senator from Oregon that the retail industry
was not consulted before the administration committed to setting up the
program. I was happy to join the Senator from Oregon on the letter to
USTR and Commerce, and I had hoped that we would receive a response
before a vote on PNTR on the Senate floor. Is it the Senator's
understanding that we will not receive a response to our concerns
before the vote?
Mr. SMITH. It is my understanding that lawyers from USTR and Commerce
have advised Ambassador Schwab and Secretary Gutierrez that because a
notice has been placed in the Federal Register announcing the creation
of the import monitoring program and soliciting public comment, they
cannot provide a substantive written response to our letter.
Nevertheless, Ambassador Schwab and Assistant Secretary of Commerce
Spooner graciously agreed to meet with the Senator from California and
me to provide us with more information about the import monitoring
program and how it will be implemented.
Mrs. FEINSTEIN. The Senator from Oregon is correct. We had a robust
and substantive discussion. Ambassador Schwab and Assistant Secretary
Spooner assured us that the import monitoring process will be fully
consistent with U.S. law and applicable WTO rules. No new precedent
would be set. In addition, they also agreed that the import monitoring
process should not harm U.S.-Vietnam textile and apparel trade, and
they assured us that no additional reporting requirements or other
burdens would be placed on importers of textiles and apparel from
Vietnam. This means that it is their intention that monitoring will be
based upon information already collected in the normal customs entry
process or otherwise available to the Government. Finally, they assured
us that the views of our constituents and all Members of Congress would
be taken into account as the process is developed. Is that the
Senator's understanding?
Mr. SMITH. Mr. President, the Senator from California is correct.
Specifically, USTR and Commerce told us that it is their intention that
any investigation would only cover those textile and apparel products
imported from Vietnam which are like or identical to a product also
produced in the United States. This also means that, consistent with
U.S. law, the domestic producer will have to request monitoring and
supply information about their employment levels and production. This
makes sense to me because why would the U.S. Government monitor a
product from Vietnam that is not produced in the United States or that
the U.S. domestic industry is not interested in being monitored in the
first place? It is also my understanding that according to U.S. law,
any finding of critical circumstance, which would trigger preliminary
antidumping duties, would only be made during the course of an
investigation and not in advance of an investigation.
Mrs. FEINSTEIN. Mr. President, I appreciate the Senator's commitment
and hard work on this issue. With the assurances from Ambassador Schwab
and Assistant Secretary Spooner, I will support legislation granting
permanent normal trade relations status to Vietnam. Would the Senator
from Oregon agree that we will continue to follow this process closely
to ensure that USTR and Commerce live up to their commitments and
implement this program in a manner that is fully consistent with U.S.
law and our WTO obligations?
Mr. SMITH. Mr. President, I agree with the senior Senator from
California, and I would like to thank her for standing with me on this
important matter. I too will support PNTR for Vietnam. Both of us are
committed to a strong and mutually beneficial United States-Vietnam
trade relationship. Both of us understand how important the vibrant and
growing Vietnam market is to our constituents. I look forward to
working with the senior Senator from California to provide effective
oversight of the monitoring program and ensure that the voice of
retailers across the country are heard in the discussion of U.S. trade
policy. I trust Ambassador Schwab when she told us that she intends to
have this monitoring process work in the way we discussed in our
meeting. As the senior Senator from California knows, we have many
difficult trade initiatives that we will consider next year. I, for
one, will measure my willingness to work with the administration on
these upcoming initiatives, in part, based on the good faith of the
administration in implementing this monitoring process in a fair and
normal way.
____________________