[Congressional Record Volume 157, Number 148 (Wednesday, October 5, 2011)]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Page E1769]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                   TRADE LAW ENFORCEMENT ACT OF 2011

                                 ______
                                 

                        HON. MICHAEL R. TURNER-

                                of ohio

                    in the house of representatives

                       Wednesday, October 5, 2011

  Mr. TURNER of Ohio. Mr. Speaker, trade agreements have the potential 
to increase export opportunities for U.S. businesses by removing market 
access barriers. However, U.S. companies' ability to take advantage of 
opportunities created by these, and existing, U.S. trade pacts depends 
on their government's willingness to enforce its trade agreements. 
Currently, U.S. companies face many non-tariff barriers (NTBs) that 
violate existing trade agreements. This bill offers an additional way 
for U.S. companies to get the United States Trade Representative (USTR) 
to act on market access barriers that are unlawful under any U.S. trade 
agreement.
  NTBs are devices other than tariffs that are used to restrict the 
flow of imports into an economy. Under current law, the USTR has the 
ability to retaliate against a wide variety of unfair trade practices, 
including market access problems caused by NTBs. Sections 301 through 
310 of the Trade Act of 1974, as amended, (Section 301), give USTR a 
mandate to take retaliatory action when the rights of the United States 
under any trade agreement are being denied. USTR starts this process by 
initiating an investigation that includes formal negotiations with the 
country suspected of being in breach of an agreement. Should the issue 
not be resolved through negotiation, at the end of the investigation, 
USTR issues a determination as to whether the trade practice at issue 
is denying U.S. rights under an agreement. If the determination is 
affirmative, the USTR enters the formal dispute settlement process.
  While U.S. producers can petition the USTR to take action under 
Section 301, they seldom do. During 2010 USTR initiated only one 
Section 301 investigation in response to a petition. To put together a 
petition that has even a chance of passing USTR's scrutiny, companies 
have to hire an expensive Washington law firm to compile a copious 
amount of information and advocate for them before the USTR. Tens of 
thousands of dollars later, there is no guarantee that their petition 
will be accepted, or that the trade practices in question will be 
addressed in a timely fashion. This is not a realistic option for a 
small or medium-sized company, especially one that is losing business 
due to unfair trade practices.
  My bill will use a market access complaint process that the 
Department of Commerce's International Trade Administration (ITA) 
already has in place a starting point for possible action under Section 
301. ITA will have 180 days to resolve interested party complaints that 
a foreign country is engaging in an act, policy or practice that acts 
as a non-tariff barrier; if ITA is unable to resolve the issue, the 
bill mandates that the Secretary of Commerce issue an opinion as to 
whether the reported NTB meets the criteria for mandatory USTR action 
under Section 301. If Commerce issues an affirmative opinion, the bill 
mandates that USTR initiate a Section 301 investigation. Further, the 
bill clarifies that subsections of the law giving USTR discretion not 
to start an investigation do not apply and gives interested parties the 
opportunity to request a hearing.
  Only the U.S. government can ensure that U.S. trade agreements are 
enforced. U.S. companies should have every opportunity to have their 
complaints investigated and acted on. Even if only one small company 
makes a complaint about a specific NTB, it is highly probable that the 
NTB affects multiple companies in multiple sectors. Without strong 
enforcement of its agreements, the United States cannot get the full 
benefits from free trade. Given the opportunity, U.S. companies can 
compete with the best in the world and can grow and create good private 
sector jobs. This bill is one step towards ensuring that U.S. companies 
have the opportunity to achieve their full potential competing in the 
global marketplace.
  Mr. Speaker, I urge all my colleagues to support this important bill.

                          ____________________