[Congressional Record Volume 157, Number 108 (Tuesday, July 19, 2011)]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Page E1361]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                  INTRODUCTION OF THE ANTIBOYCOTT ACT

                                 ______
                                 

                         HON. HOWARD L. BERMAN

                             of california

                    in the house of representatives

                         Tuesday, July 19, 2011

  Mr. BERMAN. Mr. Speaker, today I am introducing the Antiboycott Act, 
the first major update and improvement of the 35-year-old law that 
prohibits U.S. persons and firms from cooperating with demands from the 
Arab League governments to refrain from doing business with Israel.
  This legislation rectifies a long-standing weakness in the U.S. 
antiboycott policy: the lack of a permanent and legally-sound statutory 
provision to combat the Arab League's boycott, as well as any other 
boycott that might be imposed against other U.S. friends and allies in 
the future.
  In 1977, in reaction to the Arab League's expansion of its boycott of 
Israel, Congress made it illegal for U.S. persons and companies to 
cooperate with secondary boycotts. It imposed civil and criminal 
penalties for violations. Those provisions were added to the Export 
Administration Act, EAA, of 1977 and the enforcement was assigned to 
what is now known as the Bureau of Industry and Security, which also 
administers our dual-use export controls. An office in that bureau is 
dedicated full-time to enforcing the antiboycott law and regulations.
  However, in 1994, the EAA expired and, with the exception of one 12-
month period in 2000-2001, the antiboycott law has been kept in effect 
by a series of Executive Orders issued under the International 
Emergency Economic Powers Act, IEEPA, the President's emergency 
authority. The President's annual declaration of emergency for export 
controls and antiboycott describes the national emergency as the 
failure of Congress to act. This has been the situation for 16 of the 
past 17 years.
  The use of IEEPA to continue the EAA--for both antiboycott and export 
controls--has been challenged in a series of lawsuits. Over the past 
decade, two of those lawsuits reached the federal appeals courts and 
were decided in the government's favor by split decisions. There is a 
risk that some day the government will lose.
  The Arab League continues to try to pressure U.S. firms into 
cooperating with their boycott. In FY 2010 alone, U.S. firms reported 
950 demands from governments to comply. The Bureau of Industry and 
Security counseled 1,020 U.S. firms on what their legal obligations are 
to resist. In FY 2010, BIS closed 14 cases against violators, up from 3 
in the previous year. However, it is the preventive counseling, plus 
the threat of heavy penalties, that are deterring U.S. firms from 
complying with the secondary boycott.
  The Antiboycott Act would provide a permanent and strengthened 
statute. It includes findings and a statement of U.S. policy that the 
President should take vigorous action to end both the primary and 
secondary Arab League boycott aimed at Israel.
  In furtherance of those findings and policy, the bill would give the 
President the authority, for the first time since the original law was 
enacted in 1977, to restrict or prohibit U.S. firms from participating 
in the primary boycott, as well as reauthorizing the long-standing 
prohibition on cooperation with the secondary boycott. This would be an 
important new tool to use in seeking an end to the Arab League boycott.
  This authority would apply to any other boycott that is imposed 
against U.S. friends and allies.
  Finally, the bill would update the penalties under the antiboycott 
law to reflect the current civil and criminal penalties that are now 
temporarily applied to antiboycott violations under IEEPA. Civil fines 
are authorized up to $250,000 per violation. Authority is granted to 
cancel export licenses and to deny a violator's right to export from 
the U.S. Criminal violations, that is ``knowing'' violations, would be 
punished by fines up to $1 million and up to 20 years in prison.
  Ending the Arab League boycott of Israel is in the interest of the 
people of all Middle East and North African countries, in order to 
foster trade, investment, economic growth and peace. The Antiboycott 
Act is a contribution to achieving that goal.

                          ____________________