[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 145 (1999), Part 18]
[House]
[Pages 25805-25806]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




          H. RES. 298, THE MAINTAIN U.S. TRADE LAWS RESOLUTION

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under the Speaker's announced policy of 
January 19, 1999, the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Ney) is recognized 
during morning hour debates for 5 minutes.
  Mr. NEY. Mr. Speaker, I want to thank my colleagues on a bipartisan 
basis for being here today. This is an important morning hour to talk 
about an issue that is absolutely critical to every working man and 
woman in this country.
  Mr. Speaker, I wanted to speak today about House Resolution 298, 
which is called the Maintain U.S. Trade Laws Resolution sponsored by 
the gentleman from Indiana (Mr. Visclosky). The gentleman, along with a 
lot of our colleagues on both sides of the aisle, have remained strong 
on these trade issues to make sure that we continue to have jobs for 
all of our working Americans.
  Now, the big highlight of the year, I think, was the fact that a 
previous bill offered by the gentleman from Indiana came to this floor 
and had 289 votes and unfortunately it did not get past the procedures 
of the Senate, but it showed the whole Nation, working men and women, 
that in fact we can stand together. And the Stand Up for Steel campaign 
which was supported by the unions and also by the companies and by many 
Members of the House showed that we, even though it did not pass the 
Senate, that we can keep this issue focused and we can win for our 
workers.
  Mr. Speaker, it put a lot of pressure and helped to stop some of the 
hemorrhaging of the loss of our jobs. But House Resolution 298 goes 
even beyond that. It is not just an issue for steel. It is an issue for 
many, many products and it is an important issue for our country.
  Effective antidumping and countervailing duty laws are the 
cornerstone of an open market policy. Those who want to maintain free 
trade had better realize that any amount of trade we have should be 
fair trade and that maintaining trade depends on maintaining fair 
trade. Antidumping rules are designed to ensure that exporters based in 
countries with closed markets do not abuse other countries' open market 
policies. American industries which have benefited from these laws 
include basic industrial goods, chemicals and pharmaceuticals, advanced 
technology products, consumer goods such as tomatoes, oranges, fresh-
cut flowers, cosmetics.
  The present countervailing duty rules are and have come about as a 
result of the WTO Uruguay Round 1964 to 1994 negotiations and they 
applied to all the members. The WTO agreement on countervailing duty 
measures defines the term ``subsidy.'' The definition contains three 
basic elements: A

[[Page 25806]]

financial contribution by a government, or any other public payment 
which confers a benefit. All three of these elements must be satisfied 
in order for a subsidy to exist.
  The scope of the negotiations at the Seattle Round discussions of the 
WTO was specified during the Uruguay Round, however some countries, and 
this is the danger, are seeking to circumvent the agreed list of 
negotiating topics and reopen the debate over the WTO's antidumping and 
antisubsidy rules.
  These rules have scarcely been tested since their enactment and 
certainly have not proven defective. Accordingly, avoiding another 
series of divisive fights over these rules is the best way to promote 
progress on the other issues facing the WTO.
  Therefore, Mr. Speaker, it is essential that negotiations on these 
antidumping and antisubsidy matters not be reopened at the Seattle 
Round of discussions of the WTO.
  Mr. Speaker, House Resolution 298 simply says we have a system, let 
it work. To reopen these rules at the Seattle Round is not only 
dangerous to the United States, but most importantly, it is dangerous 
to the working men and women of the United States who are trying to 
feed their families and support their communities and educate their 
children and take care of their loved ones.
  It is basic to the nature of our country to be able to have a job. So 
we are not asking for anything special. We are simply asking for fair 
treatment. That is why it is essential that we speak out today and I 
congratulate again and thank my colleagues who have put in so much time 
on this issue and thank all of those across the United States, Mr. 
Speaker, that in fact have written letters and made phone calls and 
supported measures to simply give the American workers a fair chance.

                          ____________________