[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 149 (2003), Part 2]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Page 2175]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




              INTRODUCTION OF THE DUTY PARITY ACT OF 2003

                                 ______
                                 

                   HON. CHARLES W. ``CHIP'' PICKERING

                             of mississippi

                    in the house of representatives

                      Wednesday, January 29, 2003

  Mr. PICKERING. Mr. Speaker, I rise before the House today to express 
my sincere concern for the severe economic conditions faced by the U.S. 
lumber industry. For nearly two decades our lumber industry has been at 
odds with the provincial governments of Canada over heavily subsidized 
softwood lumber. We've implemented numerous quick fixes to provide 
relief for our domestic industry, but since the expiration of the last 
U.S.-Canadian Softwood Lumber Agreement in 2001, lumber prices have 
continued to drop. If current market conditions continue, many lumber 
manufacturers will not survive the next 6 months.
  I represent the Piney Woods of Mississippi. The timber industry is 
the second largest sector of our economy behind the poultry industry. 
My constituents depend on the production of lumber and timber harvest 
for jobs and economic stability. We are losing jobs and our economic 
base in the Third Congressional District of Mississippi because heavily 
subsidized softwood lumber imports are being dumped in the United 
States by the provincial governments of Canada.
  Mr. Speaker, I realize the benefits of open markets, and my record 
clearly reflects that I am not against free trade. I am, however, 
opposed to unfair trade practices sometimes implemented by some of our 
trading partners. I oppose dumping, and I oppose the practice of the 
Canadian Government practically giving away trees to its mills for 
processing.
  The Department of Commerce knows that the provincial governments of 
Canada are engaged in unfair trade practices. This is reflected by the 
countervailing duties and antidumping duties imposed on Canadian 
softwood lumber imports. Our hope was that these duties would level the 
playing field between our two countries. But that effort has failed 
because the Canadian provincial governments have simply expanded their 
subsidies to offset our duties.
  In that light, Mr. Speaker, we are obliged to go a step further in 
our actions to promote fair trade. Today, I am introducing the Duty 
Parity Act of 2003. This legislation will clarify U.S. statute and 
ensure that our trade laws fully offset the values of unfairly traded 
products. My legislation will treat countervailing duties imposed by 
our government as costs of production when antidumping duties are 
calculated by the Department of Commerce. Not including these duties as 
costs of production will only permit continued unfair pricing by our 
trade partners at the expense of U.S. companies and workers. The Duty 
Parity Act will give the Commerce Department the authority to 
accurately account for all subsidies and impose properly valued duties. 
The EU and Canada treat countervailing duties as costs of production 
when determining antidumping duties. Why should we act differently?
  I urge my colleagues to cosponsor this legislation to provide parity 
to our domestic lumber industry. We can ask our lumber mills to compete 
within the free market. But we can't ask them to compete against the 
treasuries of the Canadian provincial governments.

                          ____________________