[Congressional Record Volume 157, Number 139 (Monday, September 19, 2011)]
[Senate]
[Pages S5715-S5720]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
EXTENDING THE GENERALIZED SYSTEM OF PREFERENCES--MOTION TO PROCEED
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Under the previous order, the Senate will
resume consideration of the motion to proceed to H.R. 2832, which the
clerk will report.
The assistant legislative clerk read as follows:
Motion to proceed to the bill (H.R. 2832) to extend the
Generalized System of Preferences, and for other purposes.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Under the previous order, the time until 5:30
p.m. will be divided and controlled between the Senator from Montana,
Mr. Baucus, and the Senator from Utah, Mr. Hatch, or their designees.
The Senator from Montana is recognized.
Mr. BAUCUS. Mr. President, I say to my friend from Alabama, I don't
plan to take a lot of time--maybe 10 minutes total.
Mr. President, in 1934, President Franklin Delano Roosevelt said:
No country, however rich, can afford the waste of its human
resources. Demoralization caused by vast unemployment is our
greatest extravagance.
President Roosevelt said these words at a fireside chat nearly 80
years ago. Our economy was slowly on the path of recovery after
suffering the worst financial crash in American history. Roosevelt had
turned his focus to helping the ``permanent army of unemployed''
Americans--those Americans who didn't have jobs. His resulting
investment in America's human resources put millions of people back to
work.
Today, we face a similar situation. After a significant financial
crisis, our economy is in tough shape. Our economic recovery is fragile
but improving. Housing foreclosures have slowed and investors are
looking for new opportunities. We have a long way to go. But 14 million
Americans are still looking for work--and that is just unemployed. If
you add the underemployed, it is probably closer to 20 million, and
maybe more than that. Like President Roosevelt, we must bolster our
investment in American human resources because, as in 1934, America's
strength is in its people.
When people are denied the opportunity to work, they are denied the
dignity that comes with that work--let alone the income, let alone
providing for their families. Trade adjustment assistance, or TAA, is
the right investment in America's workers. TAA provides training and
income support to thousands of Americans so they can get a good-paying
job right here in our own country. TAA helps them earn the dignity that
comes from putting in a good day of work.
I worked with my friend, Ways and Means Chairman Dave Camp, from
Michigan, who is a good man. We worked together on a TAA agreement that
improves the efficiency, accessibility, and effectiveness of the
program. I highly commend Representative David Camp. Our staffs have
worked very closely over and over to try to find a common agreement for
reauthorizing trade adjustment assistance. We worked to scale back the
cost of the program, while maintaining the importance of training that
helps workers secure good-paying jobs here at home.
The amendment we are offering today is one I made with Chairman Camp
on TAA. It extends coverage to workers in the services sector, which
makes up 80 percent of our economy. It wasn't there before, at least
not before 2009. Extending this coverage means manufacturing workers,
as well as computer programmers and airline maintenance technicians
will have equal access to the TAA Program.
It also extends TAA to all workers. Current law does not cover 8 of
our top 10 trade partners, including China, Japan, and Korea. Our
amendment removes this geographic limitation and expands TAA's benefits
to cover trade with all countries.
Job retraining is the heart of TAA. This training has a proven track
record of providing workers the skills they need to secure their next
job. We know it works--and it works well--in my State of Montana and
across the country.
Al Drebes worked at Plum Creek Lumber Mill in Pablo, MT. In January
2009, Al was laid off. With a young family, he needed to quickly find a
new job. But after he spent months sending his resume around, he
realized he needed to update his skills.
What did he do? Al signed up for TAA and began training in recreation
power equipment repair. Following his classroom training, TAA partnered
him with a local employer, S&S Sports, which specializes in all-terrain
motor vehicles, jet skis, and other such things that are so important
to so many people in our country--and, I might add, they are a lot of
fun. Al began on-the-job training with S&S and did such a great job
that the company hired him full time. Because of TAA job training, Al
now has the security and dignity that comes with a full day's work, and
he continues supporting his family.
In addition to providing essential job training, our TAA amendment
also helps American workers maintain health insurance for themselves
and their families. TAA-eligible workers have access to the health
coverage tax credit, which provides a 72.5-percent tax credit subsidy
to make health care
[[Page S5716]]
more affordable; otherwise, they would not have any health insurance.
With nearly 50 million uninsured Americans, this benefit is more
important than ever.
Finally, the TAA agreement strengthens programs that help America's
small businesses and small farmers. These programs--TAA for Firms and
TAA for Farmers--provide targeted, intensive technical assistance to
help small businesses and farmers improve their business plans, and
they provide seed money to implement those plans.
This bill also provides duty-free access to the U.S. market for
imported products from certain developing countries.
The Generalized System of Preferences, otherwise known as GSP, lowers
the costs on inputs for American employers across the United States.
American manufacturers use GSP imports--imports from developing
countries, where the tariffs are reduced so imports can come in more
easily--to build cars, produce steel, and manufacture hydropower
turbines, for example.
Since GSP expired last year, American companies have paid nearly $400
million in tariffs on these imports. That is an added cost to American
business of $400 million. By reauthorizing and extending GSP, we ensure
that these workers, and workers in 129 countries around the world, have
the opportunity to earn the dignity of work.
This amendment, in short, helps save and create American jobs. It
helps Americans keep their jobs by providing the low-cost inputs U.S.
manufacturers need. It helps Americans who lose their jobs get the
skills they need to secure a new job and earn the dignity a solid day
of work provides. The amendment is fully offset and doesn't add a dime
to our deficit.
This amendment invests in America's human resources, just as
President Roosevelt envisioned. It ensures our workers are not
demoralized by unemployment and that they are energized by the hope of
again standing on their own two feet.
I urge my colleagues to support it.
I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Alabama is recognized.
Mr. SESSIONS. Mr. President, I thank the chairman for his hard work
on this bill. I have supported him so many times in the past and hoped
over the last several years as we have discussed my little problem in
Haleyville, AL, that maybe some agreement could be reached. But the
U.S. Trade Representative, who talks sympathetically and does nothing,
and the congressional committee seem to be of the view that any change,
even though that is what they are empowered to do, is somehow not
possible and we should not make changes in our trade law. So I objected
today to going to this bill because I wish to see modest changes made
in it.
We are facing job losses in America. As my colleague has said, more
than 25 million Americans are unemployed or underemployed. The
unemployment rate remains above 9 percent. In Alabama, unemployment is
now higher than the national average. A few years ago, we were below
the national average.
In times such as these, Congress ought to consider options that
create a favorable environment for businesses without adding more to
the debt by spending money to try to stimulate the economy. One such
measure would be a small change in the generalized system of
preferences--the GSP--which the Senate is considering this week.
Some background: The GSP was enacted in 1974 to give developing
countries duty-free access to our markets, while still protecting
American industries. Importantly, a key concept of the whole plan of
GSP was if a product is made in America, that type of good is not
allowed duty-free access to GSP. They would not be allowed to be
imported duty free if we have an ongoing market. In some instances, we
did not have ongoing production, so we allowed poorer countries to
import duty free because it didn't lay off American jobs. Importers are
not allowed the preference of a lower rate under those circumstances.
Unfortunately, the U.S. Trade Representative concluded otherwise a
number of years ago and made an exception, straying from the original,
fundamental purpose and principle. And that exception threatens the
American sleeping bag textile industry and those industries that
support it.
In 1992, the U.S. Trade Representative added sleeping bags to the
list of GSP-eligible products in a special effort to support--it
appears, at that time--the textile industry in Czechoslovakia. But,
apparently, Czechoslovakia never produced a sleeping bag. Apparently,
this was a political deal. They wanted to help Czechoslovakia after the
fall of the wall.
I can understand that, but do you see what is happening? Some
political part of the government worrying about foreign policy decides
we don't care too much about American sleeping bags, or whatever,
because we want to make friends with this country. So we forego
American jobs for foreign jobs as a way to win favor with those
countries.
Now, I am not saying that is never good, but I am saying when we do
that time and time again we begin to concede too much of American
wealth and jobs.
So GSP was in effect in 1974 to help those countries, and I don't
think it should have been changed. But a few years ago, a Chinese
company began to produce sleeping bags and import them into the United
States. They are not eligible to be a GSP low-cost, duty-free shipper
because they are not a poorer nation that qualifies under the GSP. But
they began to import into the United States, and when it became clear
we had a good American company that could compete effectively against
them, they realized there was a loophole and that Bangladesh could
qualify for this loophole. So they moved their plant over to
Bangladesh--at least in name they moved it--and continued to supply the
materials to Bangladesh where the sleeping bags are produced and then
imported duty free under this loophole that should never have been
created because it has put Americans out of work.
So with regard to China, I just have to note it is not a principled
free-trade country. They are out aggressively to advance their interest
and the interests of their companies and to sell everything they can
sell abroad to advance their interests regardless of how many Americans
are placed out of work. So I think our leaders have to begin to be
sensitive to these practices.
When will we start tough negotiations on behalf of our workers
instead of resisting efforts to help our workers be competitive?
Instead of standing up and being tough with Jeff Sessions, the Senator
from Alabama, they need to stand up and be tough with people in
Beijing, it seems to me. I believe in free trade. My voting record
proves this. I have supported virtually every free-trade agreement. But
free trade is not free if we allow ourselves to be exploited, if we
hand unfair advantage to other nations.
Haleyville is a small town. It is in the county of Winston--known as
the Free State of Winston. Winston County claims and, I think, in
effect did secede from Alabama when Alabama seceded from the Union.
There are people in Winston County named Ulysses right now, after
Grant. It is a remarkable county. It is an hour and a half from
Birmingham, the closest center. It is very rural--15,000, 20,000,
25,000 people.
Also, Marion County is in the same area, and they have high
unemployment--about 12 percent unemployment in that area. These 100 or
so jobs are important.
I went there a few months ago. The local high school band played, and
they welcomed me. All the employees were there. They pleaded with me to
do what I could to help them save their jobs, and I promised to do so.
But I am afraid we are in a mood, and the bill is moving, and we will
just move it through and people will forget those people back home in
Haleyville. But I am not forgetting them.
I believe they have a legitimate request to make of their government
to adhere to the true principles of GSP--that they don't get to import
textiles into the United States if there is a domestic manufacturer
that would be adversely affected. They can import, but they have to pay
the 9-percent tariff that other countries pay on textiles.
So I am afraid what is happening in Haleyville, sadly, is a symbol of
our broken system. This trade loophole contradicts GSP principles. I
believe it is indefensible. It is a benefit to China
[[Page S5717]]
paid for directly by American workers. It just is. This company in
Alabama pays taxes, obeys the regulations, plays by the rules, and they
ask for nothing more than a fair shake. But how do our laws reward
them? Out of the blue, they find they have competition from a foreign
import. So we give Bangladesh the ability to skip all the taxes other
importers pay, and primarily to the benefit of a Chinese company so
they can undersell the plant in Alabama.
What happened to the President's pledge of just last week when he
said he wanted to make sure more products are stamped with three words:
``Made in America?'' The GSP is supposed to exclude benefits to
American-made textiles and import-sensitive products. Yet through a
loophole and a ruling by the USTR, sleeping bags are not even
considered a textile. If sleeping bags are not a textile, what are
they? They are not food, they are not a water pump, they are not a
piece of machinery, they are not a bench. They are made of fabric and
fibers. They are clearly a textile. For this reason, some sections of
the United States Code--including the Berry amendment--designates
sleeping bags as textiles explicitly. It makes no sense for the
government to recognize sleeping bags as textiles under some sections
but not others. So all I am proposing is to bring uniformity to the law
and following the intent of the GSP as initially passed.
The fast-growing exports from Bangladesh are threatening American
sleeping bags throughout the United States. It is an industry that has
grown throughout the United States. Exxel Outdoors--really a California
company--employs nearly 100 people in a county with unemployment at 12
percent. But already Exxel has seen a 20-percent decrease in its sales.
If the appropriate changes are not made, this factory will close and
100 American workers in Alabama will lose their jobs, and others around
the country will lose their jobs.
Let me tell you a little more about Exxel. They came under new
ownership in 2000. The new owner had planned to close the factory and
send the jobs to Mexico to try to build a plant in Mexico. Instead, he
realized the competitiveness of being in Alabama at this plant. He met
and liked the people in Haleyville. They surprised him. He thought he
would try it, he would give it a shot. He brought jobs back from Mexico
and China. Since then they have prospered, creating quality sleeping
bags right here in the United States.
Exxel uses suppliers in New York State, New Jersey, North Carolina,
Tennessee, and Mississippi. This is how a manufacturing system works in
a country such as the United States. It has ripple effects far beyond
what some people might think.
I met one of the great industrialists in Germany recently who is
investing in Alabama. He told me we have to have a Renaissance in
manufacturing in the industrialized first world, and he was very
sincere about this. He is a highly intelligent, accomplished man.
As you can see from this map, this little plant in Alabama is
supporting people in Mississippi; Cullman, AL; Atlanta, GA; Volunteer
Thread in Nashville; Wiggy's in Clinton, TN. They make sleeping bags. I
have a letter from them saying their business will be threatened too.
Martex Fiber in Spartanburg; Consolidated Fibers in Charlotte; Royal
Slide in New Jersey; Polartec in Lawrence, MA; Pennsylvania, New York,
Vermont, Colorado, and California. So these things have ramifications.
Indeed, recently, by chance, I was talking to a person with deep
experience in the textile industry, and he told me they are becoming
more competitive. He says we are actually gaining back jobs from
abroad. That is exactly what was happening here. This man gambled. He
bet on the United States. He didn't know they would figure out a way to
go to Bangladesh and undercut him.
So this carve-out created for Czechoslovakia, discovered and used by
a Chinese company, is creating jobs abroad and not in the United
States. So the proposed fix I have suggested is not some sort of
corporate welfare. It would not lower taxes for any business. Indeed,
it would ensure we collect a little tariff duty on products coming in
from Bangladesh. They can ship them in, but they have to pay the normal
tariff of 9 percent on imported textiles. It would not add one cent to
the deficit of the United States. It would give no loan guarantees, no
subsidies, no handouts. The fix simply declares sleeping bags are what
they are--textiles--and subject to the rules of textiles under GSP.
Really, it would ensure Exxel and other companies in the United States
have the same competitive position they had before this plant was moved
to Bangladesh.
Some are calling this an earmark. I don't believe that is true or
fair to say. Earmarks give direct financial benefit to an entity
through tax benefits or government grants. This is not a grant. It does
not eliminate tariffs so Exxel will pay less taxes. It doesn't give a
direct benefit to Exxel. It does not cost the United States one cent.
It eliminates an unfair earmark that already allows a Chinese-run
company to purchase raw materials worldwide, manufacture sleeping bags
at a Bangladesh factory, and then import them into the United States
duty free.
I repeat: I am trying to strip an earmark. I am trying to actually
strip an earmark for China from the bill that is before us. I am asking
that we uphold the values and rules we have put into law. I don't know
how this was changed after Congress passed it in 1974, stating if you
import textiles you have to pay a tariff unless there is no domestic
manufacturer of that textile against whom you are competing. How that
got changed, I am not sure.
So I ask that we eliminate the special benefit that has been provided
to this country and this one textile.
Exxel is just one company that is currently being hammered by this
unfair loophole. They are indeed in financial threat. They were
supplying 30 percent of the sleeping bags in the United States. They
saw a decline of 20 percent already in that product.
Mr. President, I will offer for the Record letters written by other
businesses in support of Exxel's efforts.
Stein Fibers of Charlotte says:
Exxel Outdoors has been a solid customer of Stein Fibers,
Ltd for many years. We supply synthetic fiberfill for
sleeping bags made at their Haleyville, Alabama factory.
Wiggy's Inc. says:
Bangladesh recently entered the U.S. market and supplied
over 700,000 sleeping bags last year.
Wiggy's makes sleeping bags in Grand Junction, CO. They have copied
their Senators, and they ask that we support my effort.
Rusken corrugated containers in Cullman, AL, supplies the shipping
packages for these products as they are shipped.
Dunlap Industries in Chattanooga, TN, says they are one of the
largest suppliers of thread in the United States, and Exxel is a
customer of theirs.
Smurfit-Stone Container Corporation in Tupelo, MS, is also a supplier
of Exxel.
Royal Slide Sales Company, Inc., of Garfield, NJ, says:
As Royal Slide provides sleeping bag carry cases to Exxel's
Haleyville, Alabama factory, the resulting decrease in their
business from this surge in duty-free importation of
synthetic fill sleeping bags is directly leading to a
decrease in our business.
They support reform.
Martex Fiber says:
We are a major supplier of fiberfill to Exxel Outdoors. We
have been proud to watch one of the last--
Listen to this--
We have been proud to watch one of the last remaining
American sleeping bag factories keep going steadily, even as
virtually all its competitors moved their facilities to other
countries.
They go on to say that Exxel is entitled to relief.
Consolidated Fibers of Charlotte, NC, says:
The impact on our company will be great if the Exxel
Outdoors factory is forced out of business by these foreign
imports without duty. We supply a great deal of fiberfill to
Exxel on an ongoing basis.
Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that these letters be printed
in the Record.
There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in
the Record, as follows:
Stein Fibers, LTD.,
Charlotte, NC, February 5, 2010.
Re Comments--Exxel Outdoors petition, GSP, sleeping bags,
HTSUS #9404 30.80, Docket #USTR-2010-0004.
Secretary, United States International Trade Commission:
Exxel Outdoors has been
[[Page S5718]]
a solid customer of Stein Fibers, LTD for many years. We
supply synthetic fiberfill for the sleeping bags made at
their Haleyville, Alabama factory.
We are writing in support of withdrawing from GSP, the
sleeping bags coming in duty free to the United States under
HTSUS 9404.30.80. With duty free status, the importers of
these bags are taking away significant business from Exxel
Outdoor, which in turn will hurt our business.
If these sleeping bags continue to get duty free treatment
under GSP, before long Exxel's factory will be forced to
close down. In 2009 Exxel Outdoor accounted for $407,985.80
of our revenue, which would be of significant loss to our
company.
If you would like to discuss this with me, please contact
me at your convenience.
Sincerely,
Randy Layman,
Stein Fibers, LTD.
____
Wiggy's Inc.,
Grand Junction, CO, May 24, 2011.
Hon. Ron Kirk,
U.S. Trade Representative, Executive Office of the President,
Washington, DC.
Dear Ambassador Kirk: I understand that the Administration
will decide soon on the petition filed by Exxel Outdoors
(USTR-2010-0017) and determine if sleeping bags should be
duty-free under the Generalized System of Preferences (GSP),
assuming that Congress re-authorizes that program. I am
writing to urge you to recommend that imports of sleeping
bags from all countries remain subject to the normal U.S.
duty-rate of 9 percent. If non-down sleeping bags from low-
wage countries like Bangladesh are duty-free, it will pose a
great threat to the remaining U.S. sleeping bag producers
such as Wiggy's.
Until recently China was the only meaningful foreign
competitor in the U.S. sleeping bag market. Imports from
China are, and always have been subject to the normal duty
rate for sleeping bags. This has enabled some U.S.
manufactures such as Wiggy's to remain competitive with
foreign suppliers. However, Bangladesh recently entered the
U.S. market and supplied over 700,000 sleeping bags last
year.
With rising costs in China and other global dynamics,
Bangladesh is the world's low-cost manufacturer of textile
products such as sleeping bags. Manufacturers in Bangladesh
are ramping up production of sleeping bags and will continue
to do so, just as they are with other textile products. There
is little doubt that over the next few years Bangladesh will
take a sizable share of the U.S. market presently filled by
China. The only remaining question is: Will Bangladesh also
capture the market share presently serviced the U.S.
manufacturers? The answer to that question will be determined
by the decision you are about to make the petition filed by
Exxel Outdoors.
U.S. manufacturers can compete if the trade laws are fair
and equitable. It is grossly unfair that Bangladesh can
import fabrics, fiber fill and other materials duty-free from
China, assemble them into sleeping bags, and export the
finished product duty-free to the U.S., even though the vast
majority of those sleeping bag inputs are products of China.
Conversely, U.S. manufacturers must pay duty on any of the
components we import to produce sleeping bags.
I trust you will recognize this injustice, and agree that
GSP is not supposed to harm or threaten U.S. manufacturing.
Please grant Exxel Outdoors' request to remove non-down
sleeping bags from GSP.
Sincerely.
Jerry Wigutow,
President.
____
Rusken Packaging, Inc.,
Cullman, AL, February 3, 2010.
Re Docket # USTR-2010-0004, Exxel Outdoors Petition on
Sleeping Bags, HTSUS
# 9404.30.80.
Secretary, United States International Trade Commission:
Rusken Packaging has enjoyed a long time relationship with
Exxel Outdoors, supplying them with shipping cartons for
their sleeping bags. Exxel is a stellar example of the
quality work ethic that we have here in Alabama.
We wholeheartedly support Exxel in their petition to
withdraw synthetic-filled sleeping bags from the GSP. We
believe this creates unfair competition for Exxel's American-
made product This Is not only harming Excel, it is hurting
the American companies that Exxel sources from, such as
Rusken Packaging.
For the good of many American businesses, please remove
these sleeping bags from the GSP.
If you would like anything additional from me, I will be
glad to make myself available to you.
Warm regards,
John Giatinna,
Rusken Packaging, Inc.
____
February 10, 2010.
Re Docket USTR-2010-0004--Exxel Outdoors Petition on GSP,
HTSUS # 9404.30.80.
Secretary, United States International Trade Commission: As
one of the largest suppliers of thread in the United States,
U.S. Thread is in strong favor of the petition to remove
synthetic fill sleeping bags from the GSP--the same type of
bags that are cut and sewn at the Exxel Outdoors factory in
Alabama.
This special duty-free treatment for sleeping bag imports
from other countries could very well force Exxel to shut down
their Alabama factory. This would negatively impact U.S.
Thread's business to a great extent, and many communities
throughout the Southeast United States.
We can ill afford to lose a significant customer like Exxel
Outdoors. The loss of Exxel Outdoors would devastate the
community of Graysville, TN by adding to already astronomical
unemployment rate in this area. We have been supplying Exxel
Outdoors with all of their sewing thread for many years, and
if Exxel were forced to close their doors due to, what we
believe, would be an extremely unfair trade agreement, an
already economically depressed area would experience the loss
of an additional 200 jobs, and a revenue loss to U.S. Thread
of $500,000 per year.
U.S. Thread has already lost far too many textile and
apparel customers to foreign competition. Evidence of this is
the fact that In 2000 our active employee number was 80. In
2010, that number has been reduced to just 25. We can
factually attribute this directly to foreign, absurdly low
cost labor, arid back room trade deals.
Thank you for this opportunity to express our support on
this important matter. Please do not hesitate to contact me
if you have any questions or would like further comment.
Robbie Owens,
Director of Sales and Marketing,
U.S. Thread/Dunlap Industries, Inc.
____
Smurfit-Stone
Container Corporation,
Tupelo, MS, February 5, 2010.
Re Docket--USTR-2010-0004, Exxel Outdoors Petition, HTSUS
#9404.30.80.
Secretary, United States International Trade Commission:
Smurfit-Stone Container Corporation strongly supports the
petition by Exxel Outdoors to remove synthetic-filled
sleeping bags from the list of duty-free imports in the GSP.
The duty-free importing of these sleeping bags is giving
foreign countries an unjustifiable price advantage over
Exxel's product, hurting their sales.
As a result, Smurfit-Stone directly loses business from
Exxel. We supply Exxel Outdoors with hundreds of thousands
shipping cartons per year, but this will continue to
significantly decrease as the duty-free foreign imports
continue.
In the event Exxel were to close is facilities in Alabama,
the impact to Smurfit-Stone Container Corporation would be a
loss of approximately $500,000 in packaging revenue, which
would in turn affect more than 200 Mississippi workers.
We greatly appreciate this opportunity to share our views
with you. Please do not hesitate to contact us if you would
like anything further from us.
With thanks,
Danny Kennedy,
Smurfit Stone Container Corporation.
____
Royal Slide Sales Co., Inc.,
Garfield, NJ, February 5, 2010.
Re Docket #--USTR-2010-0004, Petition regarding GSP treatment
of HTSUS #9404.30.80.
Secretary, United States International Trade Commission:
Royal Slide Sales Company respectfully agrees with the
petition of Exxel Outdoors, requesting that you withdrawal
certain sleeping bags from the GSP list of products.
As Royal Slide provides sleeping bag carry cases to Exxel's
Haleyville, Alabama factory, the resulting decrease in their
business from this surge in duty-free importation of
synthetic fill sleeping bags, is directly leading to a
decrease in our business.
We do not object to imports generally. To the contrary,
Royal Slide imports many of our products. But when imports of
a finished product directly threaten a U.S. manufacturer, at
minimum imports should be assessed the normal duty-rate.
The duty-free imports are giving them what we see as a
large, unjustified price advantage over Exxel, and we request
that you rule to remove the imports from the GSP.
Should I be able to assist you further with your inquiry
into this issue with any additional information, please to
not hesitate to contact me at the number or email provided
below.
Sincerely,
Lew Neuman,
Royal Slide Sales Company.
____
Martex Fiber,
February 4, 2010.
Re Exxel Outdoors GSP Petition on HTSUS 9404.30.80, Docket #
USTR-2010-0004.
Secretary, United States International Trade Commission:
Martex Fiber Southern Corporation is submitting this letter
to urge that you remove the synthetic-filled sleeping bags
from GSP, as Exxel Outdoors' petition requests.
We are a major supplier of fiberfill to Exxel Outdoors. We
have been proud to watch one of the last remaining American
sleeping bag factories keep going steadily, even as virtually
all its competitors moved their facilities to other
countries.
As importers are now bringing in duty-free sleeping bags,
this is taking away Exxel's ability to compete in its
industry. As Exxel Outdoors loses this business, so does
Martex Fiber.
The U.S. textile industry has already suffered enough.
Given the tow wages and other advantages companies operating
in foreign countries have, it is only fair that importers of
sleeping bags pay the normal duty rate of 9%.
[[Page S5719]]
Please do not hesitate to contact me If you would like any
additional from me on this.
Very best,
Jimmy Jarrett,
President, Martex Fiber Southern Corporation.
____
Consolidated Fibers,
Charlotte, NC, February 5, 2010.
Re Docket USTR-2010-0004, Petition by Exxel Outdoors On
Sleeping Bags HTSUS #9404.30.80.
Secretary, United States International Trade Commission: We
at Consolidated Fibers support without hesitation, the
petition by Exxel Outdoors to remove synthetic fiberfill
sleeping bags (HTSUS #9404 30.80) from the GSP duty-free
treatment.
The impact on our company will be great if the Exxel
Outdoors factory is forced out of business by these foreign
imports without duty. We supply a great deal of fiberfill to
Exxel on an ongoing basis.
The closure of this factory would weigh negatively on our
revenues and our staff.
America cannot afford to lose any more good jobs because of
a duty-free advantage given to products from another country.
Especially in the Exxel's area of the country where the
unemployment rate is nearing 18%.
I will be happy to make myself available to you for
discussion, or to answer any questions you may have. My
contact information is provided below. Thank you.
Best Regards,
Bob Kunik,
Owner, Consolidated Fibers.
Mr. SESSIONS. Companies in North Carolina, New Jersey, Tennessee,
Colorado, and Mississippi are asking for help on this matter.
I support the GSP. I believe in trade. I will continue to support it.
But I only ask that when we have a problem, either the USTR or the
Congress listen to somebody and fix it every now and then, not just
consider we have a big train here and we are not going to stop to
listen to anybody with a suggestion for improvement. A small change
will prevent an unfair benefit from accruing to a Chinese company and
will prevent more Americans from losing their jobs. This will ensure
that trade is free and principled and plentiful.
Senator Baucus and I have talked about this, and he has looked at me
sadly and listened patiently. But we are down at the licklog, and no
relief has been obtained, and that is why I am here today.
I thank the Chair.
I yield the floor, and I note the absence of a quorum.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
The assistant legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
Mr. SESSIONS. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order
for the quorum call be rescinded.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
Remembering Senator Charles Percy
Mr. SESSIONS. Mr. President, I would like to share a few thoughts on
the passing of Senator Chuck Percy.
Among other things he did in his remarkable life--successful in
business and politics--he had a connection to Mobile, AL, my hometown.
I believe he was born in Pensacola, FL, and was connected to Thomas
Hord Herndon, who was a Congressman from Alabama and resided in Mobile
and was well known. I am a distant descendent of Congressman Herndon,
and I can always remember, as a young person, particularly my great-
aunts talking about him. They followed his career, and I began to
follow his career. Maybe it was a factor in my becoming a Republican at
a time in Alabama when most were not. He was successful and young and
vibrant and created a great image for public service, and it filtered
down to this young guy in rural Alabama in a positive way.
So I would just say, Senator Rockefeller, we have lost a great
American. He had a tremendously successful career in business and
politics. He was a man of integrity and drive and commitment and good
spirit. I think we are wise in this body to pause a moment and to be
appreciative and to remember people who serve their country in that
fashion.
My sympathies are with the Percy family and the Rockefeller family.
I yield the floor.
Mr. HATCH. Mr. President, I ask the Record to reflect that if
I would have been present for today's vote, I would have voted to
invoke cloture on the motion to proceed to H.R. 2832, to extend the
Generalized System of Preferences.
I would like to express my continued support for the extension of the
Generalized System of Preferences, GSP. As the GSP expired on December
31, 2010, I am quite happy to see the Senate finally poised to take up
this much overdue extension of this valuable trade program.
I am also hopeful that this process will finally lead to quick
consideration of our pending trade agreements with Colombia, Panama,
and South Korea.
These agreements are long past due. Unfortunately, they have been
delayed because the President has made it clear that his most important
trade priority is to spend more money on a domestic worker retraining
program of dubious effectiveness. He has also made it clear that,
unless Congress accedes to his demands, he will never submit these job
creating trade agreements to Congress. It is a travesty that the
President cares more about spending money than creating jobs.
Yet now that we have this trade vehicle on the floor, I am hopeful we
can find a way to allow a full and fair debate on TAA--and in doing so,
finally remove what we hope is the last obstacle in front of these
three free trade agreements.
The GSP bill itself is important to our economy. The 2-year extension
of GSP will provide greater certainty for both U.S. businesses and
developing country exporters who are able to utilize the benefits of
the program. The program has secured strong bipartisan support for over
three decades, and I only expect this trend to continue.
The GSP allows for nonreciprocal, duty-free tariff treatment of
certain products from designated developing countries. In fact, some of
the top GSP beneficiary developing countries in 2010 were Angola,
Indonesia, Equatorial Guinea, South Africa, the Philippines, and
Turkey. In order to be designated as a beneficiary country, nations
must adhere to an extensive criteria list. In turn, GSP is not only a
trade program, but can also be seen as one of our effective foreign
policy tools.
For starters, beneficiary countries must protect intellectual
property rights, recognize workers' rights, commit to the elimination
of child labor, and prevent the seizure of property belonging to U.S.
citizens or businesses.
GSP continues to promote trade, rather than aid, to nations that are
advancing their economic development; it has worked to stimulate U.S.
exports in these markets; and encourages the elimination of trade
barriers in developing countries.
What does this mean for the United States? This means our Nation not
only has an opportunity to assist developing countries to promote
economic growth in their nations, but we also have an opportunity for
our American businesses to thrive, while lowering costs for American
consumers. Across our Nation, U.S. manufacturers and importers benefit
by receiving goods and raw materials at a lower cost. According to the
U.S. Chamber of Commerce, approximately three-quarters of U.S. imports
that rely on the GSP program, use raw materials, parts and components,
or machinery and equipment, to manufacture goods in the U.S. for
domestic consumption or for export.
So, although the GSP program was initially created to assist with
economic growth in the developing world, it now provides great
assistance to our businesses here in the United States.
In 2010 the United States imported $23 billion in GSP-eligible goods
from 129 countries around the world. This includes 4,800 eligible
products. And, according to the Office of the United States Trade
Representative, GSP saved American importers $682 million in duties in
2010. These numbers cannot be overlooked--they represent millions of
dollars in savings for our manufacturers, retailers, farmers and
families. GSP is particularly helpful for our small businesses. The
savings on duties by these small businesses allows them to compete with
larger companies.
During these uncertain and challenging economic times, we must give
our businesses the necessary tools to compete not only in the global
market, but also here at home. Unfortunately, the 9 months that the
program has not been operational has negatively affected the
competitiveness of thousands of American businesses that rely on duty-
exemptions. For these companies, GSP is an integral component of their
business model.
In fact, according to the Coalition for GSP, from December 31, 2010,
when the
[[Page S5720]]
GSP program expired, U.S. companies have paid an additional $1.8
million a day in new duties. To date, this amounts to nearly $480
million in unnecessary additional costs for companies. Businesses in
every state in the Nation have been affected by the expiration of GSP
and have a vested interest in the renewal of the program.
For example, in my State of Utah--the only State in the country to
import Indonesian steam and vapor turbine parts--tariffs have exceeded
$235,000 for these goods in the months following the expiration of GSP.
Components such as mountings for buildings imported from Thailand, cost
Utah businesses an additional $178,000 in tariffs through July of this
year. And the total amount of Utah imports of GSP-eligible goods from
January until July 2011 exceeded $26.2 million, of which an additional
$1.1 million in unnecessary import taxes were paid.
I have heard from Utah manufacturing companies, like Black Diamond
Equipment, which is headquartered in Salt Lake City and employs more
than 475 people worldwide. That company develops, manufactures and
distributes a broad range of products including those used for mountain
climbing, camping, and skiing. As of June 2010, they incurred more than
$40,000 in tariffs for goods imported from the Philippines--goods that
otherwise would have been covered under GSP.
If GSP is not renewed, Black Diamond is projected to pay over
$100,000 in unnecessary tariffs by the end of the year. As if that was
not enough, because of these duties, Black Diamond is faced with
reduced sales, competitiveness issues, and a limited hiring ability for
their Utah office. To help companies like Black Diamond succeed, we
must act now to renew GSP.
I have shared just a few examples of the additional costs incurred by
businesses in my State, and unfortunately, there are many other similar
scenarios across the Nation due to the expiration of GSP.
These Utah companies and other businesses around the country are left
with difficult decisions about downsizing, hiring freezes, and employee
layoffs--this at a time when our economy needs more than ever to be
adding jobs. We must lift this additional burden on our small
businesses, manufacturers, and farmers, by renewing GSP today, and
making sure we provide retroactive application.
I urge my colleagues to come together and extend the Generalized
System of Preferences until July 31, 2013, and provide the much-needed
retroactive benefits to our U.S. companies.
Cloture Motion
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The cloture motion having been presented under
rule XXII, the Chair directs the clerk to read the motion.
The assistant legislative clerk read as follows:
Cloture Motion
We, the undersigned Senators, in accordance with the
provisions of rule XXII of the Standing Rules of the Senate,
hereby move to bring to a close debate on the motion to
proceed to Calendar No. 166, H.R. 2832, an act to extend the
Generalized System of Preferences, and for other purposes.
Harry Reid, Max Baucus, Robert P. Casey, Jr., Mark Udall,
Debbie Stabenow, Jeff Bingaman, Daniel K. Inouye, Maria
Cantwell, Patty Murray, Richard Blumenthal, Michael F.
Bennet, Patrick J. Leahy, Tom Harkin, Barbara Boxer,
Kent Conrad, Sherrod Brown, Carl Levin.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. By unanimous consent, the mandatory quorum
call has been waived.
The question is, Is it the sense of the Senate that debate on the
motion to proceed to H.R. 2832, an act to extend the Generalized System
of Preferences, and for other purposes, shall be brought to a close?
The yeas and nays are mandatory under the rule.
The clerk will call the roll.
The assistant editor of the Daily Digest called the roll.
Mr. DURBIN. I announce that the Senator from Missouri (Mrs.
McCaskill), the Senator from New Jersey (Mr. Menendez), and the Senator
from Michigan (Ms. Stabenow) are necessarily absent.
Mr. KYL. The following Senators are necessarily absent: the Senator
from North Carolina (Mr. Burr), the Senator from Utah (Mr. Hatch), the
Senator from Oklahoma (Mr. Inhofe), the Senator from Kentucky (Mr.
Paul), and the Senator from Idaho (Mr. Risch).
Further, if present and voting, the Senator from Utah (Mr. Hatch)
would have voted ``yea.''
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Are there any other Senators in the Chamber
desiring to vote?
The yeas and nays resulted--yeas 84, nays 8, as follows:
[Rollcall Vote No. 139 Leg.]
YEAS--84
Akaka
Alexander
Ayotte
Barrasso
Baucus
Begich
Bennet
Bingaman
Blumenthal
Blunt
Boozman
Boxer
Brown (MA)
Brown (OH)
Cantwell
Cardin
Carper
Casey
Chambliss
Coats
Cochran
Collins
Conrad
Coons
Corker
Cornyn
Crapo
Durbin
Enzi
Feinstein
Franken
Gillibrand
Graham
Grassley
Hagan
Harkin
Heller
Hoeven
Hutchison
Inouye
Isakson
Johanns
Johnson (SD)
Johnson (WI)
Kerry
Kirk
Klobuchar
Kohl
Landrieu
Lautenberg
Leahy
Levin
Lieberman
Lugar
Manchin
McConnell
Merkley
Mikulski
Moran
Murkowski
Murray
Nelson (NE)
Nelson (FL)
Portman
Pryor
Reed
Reid
Roberts
Rockefeller
Rubio
Sanders
Schumer
Shaheen
Snowe
Tester
Thune
Toomey
Udall (CO)
Udall (NM)
Warner
Webb
Whitehouse
Wicker
Wyden
NAYS--8
Coburn
DeMint
Kyl
Lee
McCain
Sessions
Shelby
Vitter
NOT VOTING--8
Burr
Hatch
Inhofe
McCaskill
Menendez
Paul
Risch
Stabenow
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The yeas are 84, the nays are 8. Three-fifths
of the Senators duly chosen and sworn having voted in the affirmative,
the motion is agreed to.
Mr. DURBIN. Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.
The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Reed). The clerk will call the roll.
The assistant Daily Digest editor proceeded to call the roll.
Mr. COONS. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for
the quorum call be rescinded.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
____________________