[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 145 (1999), Part 4]
[House]
[Pages 4660-4667]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




   PROVIDING FOR CONSIDERATION OF H.R. 975, REDUCING VOLUME OF STEEL 
   IMPORTS AND ESTABLISHING STEEL IMPORT NOTIFICATION AND MONITORING 
                                PROGRAM

  Mr. DREIER. Mr. Speaker, by direction of the Committee on Rules, I 
call up House Resolution 114 and ask for its immediate consideration.
  The Clerk read the resolution, as follows:

                              H. Res. 114

       Resolved, That upon the adoption of this resolution it 
     shall be in order without intervention of any point of order 
     to consider in the House the bill (H.R. 975) to provide for a 
     reduction in the volume of steel imports, and to establish a 
     steel import notification and

[[Page 4661]]

     monitoring program. The bill shall be considered as read for 
     amendment. The previous question shall be considered as 
     ordered on the bill to final passage without intervening 
     motion except: (1) ninety minutes of debate equally divided 
     and controlled by the chairman and ranking minority member of 
     the Committee on Ways and Means; and (2) one motion to 
     recommit.

  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Ewing). The gentleman from California 
(Mr. Dreier) is recognized for 1 hour.
  Mr. DREIER. Mr. Speaker, for the purpose of debate only, I yield the 
customary 30 minutes to my very good friend from South Boston, MA (Mr. 
Moakley) who obviously is on a roll here and is wearing a much greener 
tie than any of us, showing his great, great celebration of St. 
Patrick's Day. Pending that, Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I 
may consume. During consideration of this resolution, all time that I 
will be yielding will be for debate purposes only.
  Mr. Speaker, House Resolution 114 is a closed rule providing for 
consideration of H.R. 975, a bill to reduce the volume of steel imports 
and establishing a steel import notification and monitoring program. 
This rule was adopted unanimously by the Committee on Rules yesterday 
afternoon.
  The rule waives all points of order against consideration of the 
bill. The rule further provides 90 minutes of debate in the House 
equally divided between the chairman and ranking minority member of the 
Committee on Ways and Means. It is the understanding, Mr. Speaker, of 
the Committee on Rules that both the chairman and the ranking member of 
the Committee on Ways and Means intend to yield this debate time in a 
fair manner. This will ensure that Members on both sides of the aisle 
who are on different sides of this very important issue are provided 
the opportunity to have their voices heard.
  Finally, Mr. Speaker, the rule provides for one motion to recommit, 
with or without instructions.
  Mr. Speaker, the United States of America has the strongest, most 
prosperous economy on the face of the earth. There are many reasons for 
that. We have the world's most skilled workers. We have entrepreneurial 
investors and inventors in unmatched numbers. We have the largest 
single market anywhere. And, we are riding on that great wave of the 
information revolution.
  Mr. Speaker, these are all keys to our prosperity and growth, but 
they are not enough. Right at the heart of our prosperity is the 
openness and dynamism of our economy. We accept the reality of change 
and adapt to it better than anyone else. Western Europe and Japan are 
big and rich with millions of skilled workers, but they suffer from 
slow growth and massive unemployment. Why? They are not as open and 
dynamic as we are. They fear inevitable change. And what happens? Their 
people lose because of that fear of change.
  Now, there is no question that an open, dynamic economy offers as 
many challenges as it does opportunities. International commerce is 
increasingly a fact of life in our economy. It means new markets and it 
means very stiff, tough competition. But no question, no question about 
it at all, Mr. Speaker, we as a Nation are succeeding. U.S. jobs have 
increased by 6 million in the years since the North American Free Trade 
Agreement and the Uruguay Round of the General Agreement on Tariffs and 
Trade were passed. Trade now accounts for 30 percent of our gross 
domestic product and 25 percent of jobs in this country. We would not 
enjoy our job and wealth boom if we did not have open trade and 
competition.
  Given our leading role in the global economy, turmoil such as the 
financial crisis that swept through many developing countries in the 
past 18 months has a major impact right here at home. Today, we are 
going to consider legislation that specially selects the U.S. steel 
industry for special protection to assist them in dealing with the 
challenges posed by that foreign financial situation. It is clear to me 
that a majority of Members of this House want to have this debate. It 
is my hope that as we delve into this issue, the House rejects this 
special interest legislation.
  Mr. Speaker, let us take my State of California. Our State, I am very 
proud to say, is on the cutting edge of our Nation's 21st century 
economy. Almost half of every dollar in the largest State of the union 
of economic activity is connected to trade, a 50 percent greater share 
than the Nation as a whole. The neighboring ports of Long Beach and Los 
Angeles combine to be the second largest seaport in the world, second 
only to Singapore. More than 15 percent of southern California's small 
businesses export products and services to other countries, many to 
Asia. This is five times the national rate.
  Given our State's stake in exports to Asia and Latin America, 
California has been challenged more than most by this global economic 
turmoil. Shipments to Asia account for half of the State's merchandise 
exports. Asian problems represent a real threat to our State's economy. 
In California, millions of working families depend on producing 
computers, electronic components, industrial machinery, communications 
equipment, aircraft, semiconductors, textiles, apparel, automobiles, 
glassware, engineering and management services, and a whole range of 
agriculture interests that have been challenged by the impact of 
currency devaluations and financial turmoil. They are fighting to meet 
the challenge by becoming more efficient and diversifying their 
markets.
  The steel industry should do the same. The fact is 40 times more 
American workers are employed in U.S. industries that use steel than in 
the industries that actually make steel. When we use protectionism to 
shield one industry, 40 times more Americans are injured. Remarkably, 
today, U.S. steel production and demand are at record levels. Let me 
underscore that again. U.S. steel production and demand are at record 
levels. Revenue per ton of steel was stable in 1998, not declining. 
Yes, there were fewer steel jobs at the end of 1998 than at the 
beginning, but that is a reality of the industry as it modernizes. 
Since 1993, jobs have fallen by 9,000 per year while production of 
steel has actually increased.
  Mr. Speaker, protectionism is not the answer to the pain caused by 
economic turmoil overseas. Special interest protectionism will kill the 
goose that laid the golden egg that is our growing economy. The 
sponsors of H.R. 975 are asking us to start down a well-worn path to 
economic despair. Protectionism is fool's gold.
  Mr. Speaker, I advocate passage of this rule. We need to engage in a 
very serious debate to talk about this issue, and then I hope that this 
House will reject this legislation.
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. MOAKLEY. Mr. Speaker, I thank my very dear friend from California 
who has agreed to wear a green tie for sake of harmony today for 
yielding me the customary half-hour, and I yield myself such time as I 
may consume.
  Mr. Speaker, the United States economy is booming. Economic growth is 
strong, job creation is at an all-time high, but not every American is 
sharing in the good times. At the same time the stock market is 
flirting with the 10,000 mark, 10,000 American steelworkers lost their 
jobs last year, 10,000 hardworking American families lost their 
paychecks, and 10,000 steel families face a very uncertain future.
  Mr. Speaker, there is only one reason for this. It is the flood of 
cheap foreign steel being dumped into our markets in violation of the 
international trade laws, and it is drowning our steel industry.
  Mr. Speaker, back in the 1970s, the American steel industry faced 
another crisis, a crisis of competitiveness. The American steel 
industry invested $50 billion to modernize plants and equipment. They 
also downsized, giving up about 200,000 good jobs. They innovated. 
American steelworkers made themselves more efficient. American 
steelworkers made themselves more productive. As a consequence, Mr. 
Speaker, America now produces the highest quality steel at the lowest 
cost per ton. Let me repeat, Mr. Speaker. American steelworkers produce 
the highest quality, lowest cost steel in the entire world. But even 
the most productive workers cannot compete with countries that do not 
play by the rules.

[[Page 4662]]

The surge of unfair dumping of cheap foreign steel imports is costing 
America jobs and costing America money, and it is time that we take 
some very tough action.
  Mr. Speaker, President Clinton has recently taken steps in the right 
direction. The administration found that Russia, Japan and Brazil had 
been dumping steel and issued rulings against these countries. The 
President has virtually stopped imports of hot-rolled steel from Russia 
and Japan, imports from Brazil are down by 76 percent, but at the same 
time cheap imports from China, South Africa and Indonesia have 
skyrocketed.
  Mr. Speaker, even though the administration has taken some very good 
steps, there is much more to be done. This bill directs the President 
to take the steps to roll back the level of imported steel to the pre-
July 1997 crisis levels. This bill leaves it to the President whether 
these steps involve quotas or tariff surcharges or restraint agreements 
or any other measures.
  This bill also establishes a steel import monitoring program to make 
sure other countries comply with antidumping laws and provides 
information to help industry, labor and government respond to surges in 
imports.
  Mr. Speaker, I would like to take this opportunity to thank the 
gentleman from Indiana (Mr. Visclosky) and the other sponsors of this 
bill for their efforts. And I want to thank my dear friend from 
California who has granted this rule despite his objections to the 
legislation.
  Mr. Speaker, it is time for action. American steel is much too 
important and American steelworkers deserve better. I urge my 
colleagues to support this bill.
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. DREIER. Mr. Speaker, I am happy to yield 3 minutes to the 
gentleman from St. Clairsville, OH (Mr. Ney).
  Mr. NEY. Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the gentleman for the fact that 
we have this on the floor today. Although we would differ in opinion, 
the process is going to work by having us here.
  Mr. Speaker, as a coauthor of the Visclosky-Regula steel legislation, 
I am committed to standing up for steel. This legislation brings back 
the integrity of our antidumping provisions of the Trade and Tariff Act 
of 1930.
  But this bill is not about free trade versus fair trade versus 
protectionism. It is about illegal dumping. And that is a big 
difference. This bill is pro-worker and it is pro-American.
  Eleven thousand steelworkers, as we noted before, have lost their 
jobs. Eleven thousand steelworkers are trying to decide today, and one 
more per hour, how they feed their families, how they help their 
communities, how they survive.

                              {time}  1100

  Mr. Speaker, we are here today because the President had lack of 
courage. In a combined effort with my colleagues we introduced 
legislation to freeze steel imports at pre-July 1997 levels. This 
legislation would do what President Clinton has not done, and that is 
to stand up for steelworkers and put America's interests first for a 
change. In October we had 344 Members on a bipartisan basis in October 
that urged the end of this. Yes, the administration is now starting to 
do some things 11,000 steelworkers later, and I cannot trust that if we 
do not push through this legislation and pass it, that it will not go 
back to the way it was.
  So, Mr. Speaker, this legislation is absolutely critical.
  There is a solution; it is a simple one. We must enforce our trade 
laws. That is it. The U.S. steel industry is not asking for special 
protection, and, quite frankly, they do not need it. Our working men 
and women can compete with anyone on this planet. They can and will 
compete against any steel in the world. But we cannot go against 
illegally-dumped steel.
  But let me conclude, Mr. Speaker, and tell my colleagues why we are 
here today, how we got to this point.
  We are here today because we are going to stand up for Main Street 
today, not Wall Street. That is why this bill is here. It is here 
because of leaders like Mark Glyptis, and George Becker, and Chip 
Antonacci, and Larry Mallas and John Sanders and Dave Gossett stood up 
and spoke out, and we are here because thousands of steelworkers and 
citizens would not let this issue go, would not let this issue die. 
Thousands rallied back home in a multi-state area, and they came here 
to the streets of Washington, D.C., 7,000 strong. They brought their 
children. People came here from all walks of life, Republican, 
Democrat, Independent, the wealthy, the poor, the unemployed, the 
workers, the students. Students made phone calls. People protested. 
They stood up for their rights.
  That is why we are here today, Mr. Speaker, because people spoke out. 
The steelworkers, and the citizens, and the students and the people of 
our communities have said to their government: Stand up for us for a 
change.
  It is very simple in my mind. We are today going to support Japan or 
we are going to support Weirton, West Virginia. We today are going to 
support Brazil or we are going to support Steubenville, Ohio. This is a 
bill about the fact that America today speaks out. The people speak out 
on the floor, the people win and America wins.
  Support the rule and the bill.
  Mr. MOAKLEY. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from 
Ohio (Mr. Kucinich).
  Mr. KUCINICH. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of this rule and 
the underlying bill, H.R. 975.
  Mr. Speaker, we are here because of policies which have failed to 
protect the American steel industry and workers from unfair 
competition. The administration could have prevented this bill from 
coming to the floor by initiating its own restrictions on the surge of 
cheap imported steel, but the administration would not go to such 
lengths to protect the steel industry. But they have gone the distance 
and more to protect the banana industry.
  Mr. Speaker, does the banana industry employ 160,00 American workers? 
No. Are foreign bananas crowding out the American banana business? No. 
This has not stopped the administration from making every effort to 
protect the banana industry.
  Bananas did not build America. Steel did. Steel helped build our 
automotive industry. Steel helped build our defense. We cannot build a 
tank with a banana, we cannot build a plane with a banana, we cannot 
build ships with a banana. We did not build cars with bananas. We did 
not build bridges with bananas. We did not build America with bananas. 
We built America with steel. But the administration has ignored the 
steel industry that employs 160,000 Americans that have suffered the 
loss of 10,000 jobs since the import crisis began and that has endured 
the undercutting of its American market. The administration cares more 
about bananas than about steel. Such a trade policy is, in a word, 
bananas.
  Our approach is different from the administration's. H.R. 975 is the 
only action that will directly confront the major cause of layoffs in 
the steel industry. Our bill is America's best hope of averting an 
economic crisis of our own.
  Mr. Speaker, I urge support for the rule, and I urge support for H.R. 
975.
  Mr. DREIER. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from 
Madison Village, Ohio (Mr. LaTourette).
  Mr. LaTOURETTE. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for not only 
giving me the time, but also for bringing this rule to the floor, and, 
Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of both the rule and also the bill today 
before us. I want to thank the gentleman from Indiana (Mr. Visclosky), 
and the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Ney), and the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. 
Traficant), and the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Regula), and the gentleman 
from Ohio (Mr. Kucinich) and everyone else who had a hand in bringing 
this bill before us today.
  I do want to express some concerns about the manner in which H.R. 975 
addresses the steel dumping issue. There is no doubt many speakers will 
talk about the fact that 10,000 steelworkers have lost their jobs as a 
result of steel dumping, but for every one steelworker

[[Page 4663]]

in this country there are 40 downstream employees in the metal forming 
and metal stamping business, and I want to chat about them for just a 
minute in this 3 minutes.
  The U.S. steel industry, even when it is going full guns, is never 
able to meet all of our steel demands in this country. At current 
levels the estimates are maybe 75 percent, which leaves us with a 
shortage of 17 to 24 million tons each and every year. There are some 
contracts and applications that call for nondumped, but foreign, steel. 
There is a metal foreman in my district that has a contract that calls 
for Dutch steel, for instance, and he says that if we put in 
restrictive quotas in certain situations, well then that company will 
just have the goods stamped over in the Netherlands, and we will have 
imported into this country a finished product. If steel is unavailable 
or a specific kind of steel is unavailable for a given application, our 
downstream manufacturers will lose contracts, and imports will come 
into this country on a finished basis.
  For that reason, Mr. Speaker, I would like to engage in a brief 
colloquy with the chief sponsor of this bill, the gentleman from 
Indiana (Mr. Visclosky), and I would ask the gentleman:
  Given the concerns of a short supply, why is it that he looked at in 
H.R. 975 the quotas, tariffs and other remedies to control the amount 
of steel coming into this country rather than focusing on dumping 
margins which are contained in Section 201 of the 1974 trade act?
  Mr. VISCLOSKY. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. LaTOURETTE. I yield to the gentleman from Indiana.
  Mr. VISCLOSKY. Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the gentleman's concern.
  The reason we looked at a quantitative and global approach is 
because, if we look at a product, if we look at a specific country 
based on a price, we are not going to resolve the crisis.
  I would point out, for example, on a country basis steel exports from 
India suddenly increased to 70 percent in January of 1990 compared to 
just December of 1998. Exports from Australia increased 31 percent in 
that last month. Exports from Korea increased by 25 percent.
  So we are going to have to look at shifting within countries of 
various product lines as well as in people following behind if we do 
achieve success with one country coming in with new quantities of steel 
and again would remind the gentleman we are giving the administration 
60 days to fashion their initiative, and they have great flexibility as 
to the design of that final plan.
  Mr. LaTOURETTE. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman very much for his 
answer, and I also thank the gentleman very much for his courage in 
bringing this bill forward.
  I would ask as a further courtesy, as this bill proceeds, if we 
discover that the quotas in place by H.R. 975 have an adverse effect 
and cause a short supply for our end users in this country, that we be 
willing across the aisle to work and address that issue, and I am 
certain that we can do that.
  Mr. VISCLOSKY. Absolutely.
  Mr. LaTOURETTE. I thank the gentleman from Indiana very much.
  Mr. MOAKLEY. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from 
Illinois (Mr. Lipinski).
  Mr. LIPINSKI. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman very much for the 
time, and I rise in support of this rule and also in support of this 
resolution. In the last 12 months 10,000 American steelworkers have 
found out firsthand that fair trade is not fair and free trade is not 
free. The cost of those 10,000 American workers was more than their 
jobs. It was the loss of a lifestyle, a loss of the retirement savings, 
a loss of a promising future, and for some the cost was a lose of their 
home and even their family.
  Mr. Speaker, it has not stopped yet. Thousands of more jobs will be 
lost if we do not act now. Ten thousand, and still counting, 
steelworkers have lost their jobs, not because of fair competition, but 
because of unfair competition. Employers and employees worked and 
sacrificed together to modernize the American steel industry, making it 
once again the most efficient steel industry in the world. They are 
willing to compete fairly, but they do not have a chance unless their 
government once again makes the playing field level. Foreign countries 
facing recessions and owing interest on American loans have targeted 
America as a place to raise hard cash. Countries where it takes $400 to 
make a ton of steel are dumping it here in record amounts for $200 a 
ton. Stopping that is not protectionism. It is ending an illegal 
business practice, one we would not allow one American company to do to 
another.
  Mr. Speaker, if this administration will not show the same compassion 
for American workers as they do for the economies of Japan, Korea and 
Russia, they would stop this dumping now. They already have that power. 
I am troubled that we need to legislate an end to the dumping because 
legislation takes time, and time is something the American steel 
industry and its workers are running out of. The world tried this once 
before, and the greatest free trader of all, Ronald Reagan, put a stop 
to it. Now they are trying it again, and because this administration is 
more concerned about the world's economy, it is letting them do it.
  Mr. Speaker, this administration will not stop this, so it is up to 
us. Let us act quickly.
  This Administration cannot continue to hide behind ``overall'' rosy 
economic statistics while dismissing certain sectors of the economy as 
having troubles. Not when it already has the power to help those 
certain sectors--like the steel industry.
  Yes, people are being hired in record numbers. But, for what kind of 
jobs? Too often, people are being hired at a Wal-Mart so then they have 
the money to eat at McDonald's--who in turn hire people to serve those 
Wal-Mart employees--allowing these new McDonald workers to take their 
salary and spend it at Wal-Mart--who can then hire more low wage 
employees.
  We should not even talk about the low wage jobs being created at Wal-
Mart and McDonalds, but we should speak loudly and forcefully about the 
good high paying, benefit rich jobs these people had before they were 
laid off.
  A 20-dollar an hour job with benefits at a steel mill cannot be 
replaced by a 6-dollar job at Wal-Mart. But that's what's happening.
  And don't tell me about the average income of an American worker, 
when included in that average is a 100 million dollar severance pay to 
a Hollywood insider, a 20 million dollar bonus for a corporate 
executive who's rewarded for chopping down his workforce, and a 70 
million dollar contract to a professional athlete.
  Ten thousand, and still counting, steel workers have lost their jobs, 
not because of fair competition but because of unfair competition.
  Employers and employees worked and sacrificed together to modernize 
the American steel industry--making it once again the most efficient 
steel industry in the world.
  They are willing to compete fairly but they do not have a chance 
unless their Government once again makes the playing field level.
  Foreign countries facings recessions and owning interest on American 
loans have targeted America as a place to raise hard cash.
  Countries where it takes 400 dollars to make a ton of steel are 
dumping it here in record amounts for 200 dollars a ton.
  Stopping that isn't protectionism--it's ending an illegal business 
practice--one we wouldn't allow one American company to do to another.
  If this Administration would show the same compassion for American 
steelworkers as they do for the economies of Japan, Korea, and Russia, 
they would stop this dumping now.
  They already have the power.
  I'm troubled that we need to legislate an end to this dumping because 
legislation takes time, and time is something the American steel 
industry and its workers are running out of.
  The world tried this once before, and the greatest free trader of 
all--Ronald Reagan--took his eyes off the balance sheets and focused 
them on the American families and he said that's wrong and put a stop 
to it.
  Now, they're trying it again and because this Administration is more 
concerned about the world's economy, it's letting them do it.
  But what if that's not enough? If they're willing to let the steel 
industry be undercut by foreign competitors acting illegally, what 
other industries will they allow the same thing to be done to?
  The Administration won't stop this--so it is up to us.
  Let's do it quickly.
  Mr. DREIER. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from 
Mapleton, Utah (Mr. Cannon).

[[Page 4664]]


  Mr. CANNON. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to rise today in support of our 
steel industry. The administration, Mr. Speaker, is compromising our 
national security by failing to enforce our trade laws. Our steel 
industry is critical to our national security. American steel companies 
across the Nation are going bust. Yet without American steel companies 
to supply our Armed Forces, our national defense is useless.
  Let me cite some statistics. In the Gulf War the U.S. Army relied on 
the steel in 5,000 tanks, Bradleys and other armored personnel 
carriers. At the peak of the conflict in the Persian Gulf, the U.S. 
Navy deployed 120 ships made almost exclusively of American steel. 
Because the administration has failed to do its job in implementing 
import controls, Congress has to step in today to legislate trade 
policy and safeguard our defense.
  A vote in support of this legislation today is a vote to uphold our 
national security and stop illegal foreign dumping. This will allow our 
steel industry to rebuild and our workers to go back to work and save 
our families. I urge a yes vote.
  Mr. MOAKLEY. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from 
Michigan (Mr. Stupak).
  Mr. STUPAK. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Massachusetts 
(Mr. Moakley) for yielding this time to me.
  Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of the rule and the underlying 
Visclosky legislation, H.R. 975. It is necessary for this Congress to 
act to bring fairness to the steel industry, fairness in our trade 
policies.
  I support open trade markets, but only fair trade, not free trade.
  In the 1980's the steel industry came under heavy assault by 
countries dumping their steel here in the United States. The United 
States did nothing. We almost lost our steel industry. In my district, 
we mine iron ore, and we make iron ore pellets. To make the steel, Mr. 
Speaker, we need the iron ore pellets. Without our iron mines, there is 
no steel industry in the United States.
  In the 1980's, prior to the illegal dumping, there were over 4500 
miners in the Upper Peninsula of Michigan. Today our mines employ less 
than 2,200 miners. We cannot absorb any more losses.
  That is why Sunday I joined approximately 2,000 of my friends in 
Negaunee, Michigan, to stand up for steel. I want to see this and other 
anti-steel dumping legislation come to the floor of this House for a 
vote.
  Now I have heard some Members say that they are reluctant to vote for 
this bill because they do not want to be perceived as anti-free trade. 
The question is not about free trade, it is about fair trade.
  I say it is time to stand up for fair trade. Join us and stand up for 
our miners and steelworkers so they can rebuild the financial security 
they are fighting hard to achieve. Stand up for the steel companies who 
have worked to be the best steel producers in the world. Stand up for 
the workers and industries across a broad segment of our economy who 
need to see us get tough with foreign countries who have betrayed our 
good-faith efforts to promote open and fair trade.

                              {time}  1115

  It is time to stand up for our constituents, stand up for our 
communities, stand up for the Iron Range, stand up for steel and stand 
up for America. Vote yes on H.R. 975.
  Mr. DREIER. Mr. Speaker, may I inquire of the Chair how much time is 
remaining on both sides?
  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Gillmor). The gentleman from California 
(Mr. Dreier) has 16 minutes remaining. The gentleman from Massachusetts 
(Mr. Moakley) has 20\1/2\ minutes remaining.
  Mr. MOAKLEY. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from 
Arkansas (Mr. Berry).
  Mr. BERRY. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. 
Moakley) for yielding me this time.
  Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of the closed rule and in 
support of the legislation before us. Once again, we are here pleading 
for some action by the Congress and the administration to step in and 
take care of a problem that has been hurting the hard-working 
steelworkers of the First Congressional District of Arkansas and across 
this country for far too long.
  We are here today because the legislation we are debating will 
directly address the surge of unfairly traded imports. We must pass 
this legislation, and the administration must support it.
  I cannot even count how many times we have stood here asking for the 
same thing, enforce our trade laws, stop illegal foreign dumping of 
steel in the United States. The administration has stood by for months 
now with their hands in their pockets doing nothing for the thousands 
of steelworkers in the First Congressional District of Arkansas and 
across this country who have lost their jobs, people who have families 
to feed.
  We have been promised action time and time again but have seen 
nothing. I urge support of this legislation.
  Mr. MOAKLEY. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from 
Indiana (Ms. Carson).
  Ms. CARSON. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of the rule on the 
bipartisan Steel Recovery Act. Over the last several months, we have 
waged a battle on the issue of illegal dumping of foreign steel on 
American markets. I firmly believe that no American steelworker should 
have to sacrifice their job or their livelihood because of a foreign 
importer that breaks American trade laws. I urge my colleagues on both 
sides of the aisle to stand firm in support of U.S. steel, U.S. 
steelworkers and their families as the steel industry confronts an 
onslaught of unfairly traded steel imports.
  Collapse of demand in Asia, Russia and Brazil have resulted in 
historic global overcapacity. Foreign producers choking on a global 
steel oversupply are desperate to sell steel and are willing to dump it 
at whatever price possible, to whatever market is open to them; in 
other words, the United States. Last year alone, imports from Japan, 
Korea and Russia soared by nearly 170 percent, 137 percent and 70 
percent respectively.
  Mr. Speaker, I urge full support of the rule and for the bill.
  As a result, the U.S. steel industry is in a fight for its life. 
Steelworkers in Utah, Pennsylvania, and Alabama have been the hardest 
hit with each State losing several thousand workers. In Indiana, the 
Nation's largest steel producer, providing 23 percent of the raw steel 
made in the United States, up to 3,000 of its 30,000 steel workers--10 
percent--have had to accept shortened work weeks, lower-paying job 
assignments, or early retirement. The Department of Commerce recently 
reported that 11,000 steel workers have already been laid off. That's 
11,000 x's the American families who now face uncertain futures because 
we did not take action when we could have.
  We must take all measures necessary to halt the flood of unfairly 
traded steel into the United States. Congress and the Administration 
must work together to enact stronger trade laws to prevent surges of 
dumped and subsidized foreign steel from devastating our workers and 
companies again. And, most immediately, Congress must act to slow these 
imports now before our steel industry is too seriously injured to 
recover.
  America's hard-working families are looking to us to be their voice. 
Mr. Speaker, I intend to stand up for them and vote for H.R. 975. I 
urge my colleagues to vote in favor of this rule and in favor of the 
bill.
  Mr. MOAKLEY. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman 
from Minnesota (Mr. Oberstar), the ranking member on the Committee on 
Transportation and Infrastructure.
  Mr. OBERSTAR. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Massachusetts 
(Mr. Moakley) for yielding me this time.
  Mr. Speaker, support for the Steel Recovery Act is not protectionism; 
it is a vote for fair trade in steel, fair trade in the U.S. and 
international marketplace. 1999, for the steel industry in America is 
what Yogi Berra once called deja vu all over again. We are seeing 1980 
being repeated in 1999.
  In 1980, we had produced 120 million tons of steel, the highest steel 
production in the history of this country. Imports devastated the steel 
industry down to 80 million tons; 350,000 steelworkers lost their jobs. 
10,000 people in

[[Page 4665]]

my district, 10,000 workers in the iron ore mines of Minnesota, lost 
their jobs permanently. We went from a $450 million payroll down to 
less than $100 million in 18 months. We are not going to stand for that 
again.
  Look at what is happening just this year in the iron ore mining 
company: Eveleth Tachonite Company forced to have layoffs because 
foreign steel is taking away the market in the domestic United States, 
subsidized foreign steel.
  We have spent $50 billion in the steel industry in this country 
modernizing America's steel mills. We have the highest productivity, 
the highest quality steel, the lowest cost per man unit of steel 
produced in America in the whole world, and yet Russia, Brazil, Japan, 
Korea, other countries, are dumping steel in this country at $250 a ton 
less than we produce it right here at home. They are subsidizing and 
exporting their unemployment, dumping it on our shores. When it hits at 
home and when it hits your friends and your neighbors, then you have 
got to stand up for fairness in steel.
  We have invested over $2 billion in modernizing the iron ore mining 
and processing plants on the Mesabi iron range of northern Minnesota, 
as the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Stupak) said about his State. We 
should not stand for having that investment, that modernization of our 
industry wiped out by having foreign countries dump their unemployment 
on our shores, wiping out our American jobs.
  Steel is the most important building material in an industrial 
society. We cannot engage a war, we cannot build our highways, we 
cannot construct our airports without steel. We are not going to have 
American bridges, American ports, American airports built with foreign 
steel subsidized to take away jobs from American workers when we have 
made the investments to modernize with private venture capital this 
greatest steel industry in the whole world and this finest iron ore 
mining industry in this whole world. Vote for the Steel Recovery Act.
  Mr. MOAKLEY. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from 
Pennsylvania (Mr. Doyle).
  Mr. DOYLE. Mr. Speaker, I express my appreciation to the members of 
the Committee on Rules, the Committee on Ways and Means, to the 
leadership and to the Speaker, the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. 
Hastert), for their fair treatment on this issue. I know that the 
substance of the Visclosky steel bill may be of concern to some of 
these Members so I am gratified to see this bill brought to the floor 
for consideration.
  The subject of foreign steel dumping in the American market is simply 
too important, with an impact on too many areas of this country, for it 
not to receive consideration by the full membership of this House. This 
is the kind of bipartisan cooperation we need to see to solve the 
problems affecting American families, and I was especially gratified 
that the members of the Committee on Rules accepted our request for 
more debate time on this bill, as well as a closed rule.
  On the substance of the bill, let me just say at this point that the 
Commerce Department has already issued its determination that illegal 
dumping and foreign government subsidies have occurred in Japan, Brazil 
and Russia. This constitutes the best, most informed judgment so far by 
the U.S. Government that illegal dumping is, in fact, occurring. We are 
playing by the rules but we are losing jobs to those who are not. 
Support fair trade. Vote for the rule and vote for final passage of 
H.R. 975.
  Mr. MOAKLEY. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentlewoman from 
Ohio (Ms. Kaptur).
  Ms. KAPTUR. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Massachusetts 
(Mr. Moakley) for yielding me this time.
  Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of the rule and underlying 
legislation H.R. 975 which has been brought to us by our diligent 
colleagues, the gentleman from Indiana (Mr. Visclosky) and the 
gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Regula). I wanted to thank our good friend the 
gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. Moakley) also for helping move this 
through the Committee on Rules. It is time to put steel back into the 
spine of America. 10,000 American steelworkers losing their jobs is 
beyond belief. The administration's delay to enforce dumping laws in 
this country, unforgivable. Since 1997, a glut of dumped imports on our 
shores, Indonesia up 612 percent, Japan 157 percent, Australia 156 
percent, South Africa, 107 percent and Korea 105 percent; most of those 
countries are not covered by the administration's agreement.
  If we in this Congress cannot stand up for our own when they are 
being unfairly dumped on, it is fair to ask, when do we stand up for 
anyone? Support the rule. Support H.R. 975.
  Mr. MOAKLEY. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from 
Washington (Mr. Baird).
  Mr. BAIRD. Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague, the gentleman from 
Massachusetts (Mr. Moakley) for yielding me this time. Mr. Speaker, I 
ask that the gentleman from Indiana (Mr. Visclosky) join me in a brief 
colloquy.
  Mr. Speaker, I want Members to know that this is a good bill and I 
support the bill but I do have some concerns about its impact on the 
steel producer in my district who has told me about problems in 
obtaining the types and quantity of steel that they need from domestic 
producers. In the past, the government has been able to make very 
specific case-by-case exceptions to the import restrictions to allow 
manufacturers with legitimate short supply problems to continue 
producing their products and employing their workforce at full 
strength.
  I believe there are conditions which may warrant further examination 
along these lines in the bill before us today and I would appreciate 
the assistance of the gentleman in working to rectify these problems.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentleman from Indiana (Mr. Visclosky) 
for his response.
  Mr. VISCLOSKY. Mr. Speaker, I appreciate, first of all, the support 
of the gentleman from Washington (Mr. Baird) for the legislation, as 
well as his expression of concern.
  The issue of short supply is an issue that we have considered from 
the inception of the original legislation and do believe that it is 
covered under the bill itself. The fact is, the administration, 
following enactment of H.R. 975, will have 60 days in which to fashion 
a comprehensive program that will still allow one out of every four 
tons of steel sold in the United States to be exported from another 
country.
  Additionally, the reason we wanted to give the administration that 
flexibility and to put all of the countries and all of the products on 
one table is to make sure that companies such as the gentleman's in the 
State of Washington, earlier we had a gentleman on the other side, the 
gentleman from Ohio (Mr. LaTourette), indicate he had a problem as far 
as possible short supply, that those can be addressed.
  The reason we have looked at quantitative restrictions is, again, to 
make sure that we do not have people who are trading illegally under 
our trade laws following in behind someone else who is now obeying the 
law. That would be the responsibility of the administration, and I do 
appreciate very much the concerns the gentleman raised.
  Mr. BAIRD. Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the consideration of the 
gentleman from Indiana (Mr. Visclosky) on that. I appreciate, again, 
his hard work on this bill.
  Mr. MOAKLEY. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from 
Indiana (Mr. Visclosky), who is the perfecter of the amendment that 
will be heard on the floor.
  Mr. VISCLOSKY. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Massachusetts 
(Mr. Moakley) for the recognition.
  Mr. Speaker, I would want to use this time not only to express my 
support for the rule but to make a number of thank you's in all 
sincerity. I think the coming together of Members in this case in a 
very bipartisan fashion, to work together selflessly over a period of 
nearly 8 months, to engender the support again in a bipartisan fashion 
of this House, can lead the way to the legislative calendar for the 
next 2 years

[[Page 4666]]

and simply want to again thank the Speaker of the House, the gentleman 
from Illinois (Mr. Hastert), and the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Armey) 
particularly for their consideration. I know they have reservations 
about this legislation.
  I want to make sure that the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Bonior) is 
thanked and particularly the gentleman from Missouri (Mr. Gephardt), 
the minority leader, for their inestimable help in this matter, and 
finally the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Archer) and the gentleman from 
Illinois (Mr. Crane) who I again know have very serious reservations 
about the legislation, as well as the gentleman from New York (Mr. 
Rangel) and the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Levin).
  I would finally want to thank the steelworkers everywhere who have 
worked diligently throughout this crisis to make sure that the voice of 
workers in this country is heard, and those who have participated in 
the steel working group.
  Mr. MOAKLEY. Mr. Speaker, it gives me great pleasure to yield to the 
gentleman from Missouri (Mr. Gephardt), the minority leader of the 
House.
  Mr. GEPHARDT. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of H.R. 975, a 
bill which is designed to reduce the flood of steel imports coming into 
the United States, and I would like to commend the work of especially 
the gentleman from Indiana (Mr. Visclosky) for all the hard work that 
he has done in bringing this measure to the floor today.

                              {time}  1130

  Today, the House has the opportunity to send a strong message of 
support for American steel company workers and steel communities across 
this country.
  Mr. Speaker, more than 10,000 high-wage and high-skill Americans in 
the steel industry have lost their jobs since the onslaught of foreign 
imported steel began about 2 years ago. H.R. 975 will grant real 
tangible relief for this industry that is vital to our industrial base 
and indeed, our national security. It will also aid the efforts of 
steel workers and companies to bring about stronger action to help the 
United States steel industry.
  Mr. Speaker, an economic collapse has swept the globe, first striking 
in Asia, but now impacting Latin America and other developing countries 
as well. During the debate over IMF emergency funding to stabilize 
these economies, I warned that import surges would result from the 
Asian economic crisis and that a plan would be needed to combat the 
unfair imports. Unfortunately, no such plan has been forthcoming.
  Between 1997 and 1998, steel imports have risen nearly 100 percent 
from key countries like Japan and Korea. Thus far, 10,000 jobs have 
been lost, but thousands more jobs are threatened as an oversupply of 
foreign-made steel sits on our docks. Our steel industry is the most 
productive industry in the world. The U.S. should not be forced to 
unilaterally take in a massive global import surge.
  While the Clinton administration has taken some much-needed steps by 
expediting relief to the steel industry via traditional U.S. trade 
laws, I am concerned that the administration has not done enough to 
promote a global solution to this problem. I believe this bill can help 
us find that solution.
  The bill we are debating today simply limits imports to pre-crisis 
levels. It promotes a fair and level trading system for the United 
States steel industry by putting an end to the practice of foreign 
producers flooding our market with cheap steel that puts our industry 
and its workers in jeopardy.
  Mr. Speaker, I look forward to continuing our ongoing efforts with 
the gentleman from Indiana (Mr. Visclosky), the Steel Caucus, the 
Clinton administration, and all interested parties to develop a strong 
and realistic global solution to this crisis. Today's floor debate 
reminds us of the magnitude of the crisis in the steel country, and the 
passage of this bill will hopefully bring about the action which is 
needed to help reverse this economic calamity for thousands of workers 
and their families.
  Mr. MOAKLEY. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from 
Illinois (Mr. Rush).
  Mr. RUSH. Mr. Speaker, I also want to commend my friend the gentleman 
from Indiana (Mr. Visclosky) for all of his outstanding work that he 
has done on behalf of this particular bill and on behalf of the steel 
industry.
  I rise today in strong support of H.R. 975, the bipartisan Steel 
Recovery Act. This much-needed legislation will protect the U.S. Steel 
industry from unfair dumping of foreign steel into the United States 
market.
  Since 1997, I and other Americans have watched Asian, Russian and 
Latin American countries dump their steel into this Nation. From 1997 
to the present, U.S. Steel imports rose to 66 million tons, and it 
started out at 20 million tons. Over the past year, East Asia, Russia, 
and Brazil have illegally imported steel into this country at very low 
prices. Due in principal part to a lingering financial crisis which has 
devalued their currencies, these countries, East Asia, Russia, Brazil 
and others, have been getting away with murder.
  Today, these unfair acts must come to an end because our Nation's 
citizens are the losers. In the State of Illinois, Acme Metals has 
filed for Chapter XI bankruptcy because it could not compete with the 
surge in steel imports. In my district, many steel companies have 
slowed down production. Some companies have even laid off workers or 
shortened their hours. We cannot sit idly by, Mr. Speaker, and let 
these countries destroy our steel mills. I support H.R. 975.
  Mr. MOAKLEY. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from West 
Virginia (Mr. Wise).
  Mr. WISE. Mr. Speaker, this chart I think tells the story well. It 
begins in 1996 and finishes in January of 1999, and it is steel 
imports. Look at this line and how it suddenly shoots up.
  Well, let me tell my colleagues what that line right there means, Mr. 
Speaker. That line does not tell us about the almost 1,000 Weirton 
Steel workers that are laid off, and they did exactly what our country 
asked them to do. They downsized, they invested, they became an ESOP, 
they played fair and they asked for a level playing field, and now 
there are 1,000 of them laid off because this government has not kept 
by its bargain and fought illegal imports.
  It is not just Weirton, it is Wheeling Pit, it will be workers in 
Shinnston and Follansbee, and later it will be in Ravenswood at Century 
Aluminum and on down the Ohio River.
  So, Mr. Speaker, this Congress must act today. It must send a clear, 
resolute message to this administration and to the world: We will not 
tolerate this line going any higher. We want those workers back to 
work, and the Congress will begin that process today.
  Mr. MOAKLEY. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. DREIER. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Speaker, the debate has begun, and we have had Members on both 
sides of the aisle who wanted us to proceed with consideration of this 
legislation, and so we have done that. We start during this rule, and I 
am happy to say that in the rule we extended, as I said, by 50 percent 
the amount of time that would normally be called for, an hour of 
general debate, we have extended that to an hour and a half, and I 
think that this discussion will continue. So I am going to urge strong 
support of the rule.
  As those who have been following this debate know, Mr. Speaker, most 
of the discussion has been over the measure itself, and I have to say 
that seeing the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Archer), the distinguished 
chairman of the Committee on Ways and Means, come on to the House 
floor, it is nice to have him here, because it buoys me up in my very 
strong opposition to this ill-conceived measure.
  In fact, today the U.S. steel industry benefits from very vigorous 
U.S. enforcement of our trade remedies. One-third of the 300 
antidumping and countervailing duty orders administered by the Commerce 
Department address steel products. In addition, we have seen a great 
reduction in the last 4

[[Page 4667]]

months of imports from those countries in question: Japan, Russia, and 
Brazil. We also have to recognize that overall we have seen this 
reduction in steel imports, and that decline is one which seems to be 
continuing, and the numbers are phenomenal. If we go from November of 
1998 to January of 1999, they have dropped by 93 percent from Russia, 
49 percent from Japan, 30 percent from Brazil, and 8 percent from 
Korea.
  Mr. Speaker, we also have to recognize that 1998 was a banner year 
for the U.S. steel industry. In fact, 102 million tons of U.S. steel 
were shipped. Guess what the demand was? It was for 141 million tons. 
There is a demand out there that is greater than what is actually being 
produced, and yet, in 1998, this country produced the second highest 
amount of steel that we have ever produced in our Nation's history.
  Mr. Speaker, it is very clear that this country today is economically 
strong because of our openness and our dynamism. We should not let fear 
create the kinds of problems that it has throughout the rest of the 
world.
  Mr. Speaker, we look at the fact that there are many skilled workers 
in Western Europe, and yet their economies are faced with very, very 
great difficulties. Why? Because of the fear, because of the 
protectionism that they have imposed, and they do not have the kind of 
openness and dynamism that we have as a Nation.
  Mr. Speaker, let us look at all of those downstream workers, 40 times 
as many as there are in the actual steel manufacturing industry in this 
country. The auto manufacturers, they also are in large part, as the 
Wall Street Journal pointed out in an editorial yesterday, responsible 
for this. The 54-day strike that took place with General Motors 
obviously decreased that opportunity for production during last fall's 
strike. So it seems to me that we need to recognize that consumers 
would be devastated by going down this slippery slope.
  We have other industries, the oil and gas industry. As I said, in our 
State of California, our economy, because of the cuts in defense and 
aerospace over the past several years, hinges on our involvement in the 
international economy. Our State is the gateway to the Pacific Rim and 
Latin America. If we were to pass, move ahead with this legislation, it 
could be potentially devastating to the largest State in the Union, and 
I believe to this entire country.
  So let us stand with our Nation's openness, diversity and dynamism, 
which has, in fact, given us the strongest economic growth that we have 
seen in many, many years.
  With that, I urge support of the rule.
  Mr. MOAKLEY. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. DREIER. I yield to the gentleman from Massachusetts.
  Mr. MOAKLEY. Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the chairman of the 
Committee on Rules, the gentleman at the microphone, for his fairness 
in the presentation of this rule. He did extend the time, and he did 
allow the bill to come to the floor, even though he personally is 
opposed to it.
  I also thank the gentleman for the timing, because as he knows, in 15 
minutes the President of the United States is going to join all 
Irishmen, Congressmen of Irish descent in the Rayburn Room for a March 
17th dinner. So I thank the gentleman for that too, Mr. Speaker.
  Mr. DREIER. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time, and I 
move the previous question on the resolution.
  The previous question was ordered.
  The resolution was agreed to.
  A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.

                          ____________________