« 上一頁繼續 »
Y 4. W 36:95-46
SUBCOMMITTEE ON TRADE
ANTIDUMPING ACT OF 1921
NOVEMBER 8, 1977
Printed for the use of the Committee on Ways and Means
U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE
WASHINGTON : 1977
COMMITTEE ON WAYS AND MEANS
AL ULLMAN, Oregon, Chairman JAMES A. BURKE, Massachusetts
BARBER B. CONABLE, JR., New York DAN ROSTENKOWSKI, Illinois
JOHN J. DUNCAN, Tennessee CHARLES A. VANIK, Ohio
BILL ARCHER, Texas OMAR BURLESON, Texas
GUY VANDER JAGT, Michigan JAMES C. CORMAN, California
WILLIAM A. STEIGER, Wisconsin SAM M. GIBBONS, Florida
PHILIP M. CRANE, Illinois JOE D. WAGGONNER, JR., Louisiana BILL FRENZEL, Minnesota OTIS G. PIKE, New York
JAMES G. MARTIN, North Carolina J. J. PICKLE, Texas
L. A. (SKIP) BAFALIS, Florida CHARLES B. RANGEL, New York
WILLIAM M. KETCHUM, California WILLIAM R. COTTER, Connecticut
RICHARD T. SCHULZE, Pennsylvania
JOHN M. MARTIN, Jr., Chief Counsel
SUBCOMMITTEE ON TRADE
CHARLES A. VANIK, Ohio, Chairman SAM M. GIBBONS, Florida
WILLIAM A. STEIGER, Wisconsin DAN ROSTENKOWSKI, Illinois
BILL ARCHER, Texas JAMES R. JONES, Oklahoma
GUY VANDER JAGT, Michigan
BILL FRENZEL, Minnesota
HAROLD T. LAMAR, Professional Staff
DAVID B. ROHR, Professional Staff
American Iron & Steel Institute, Dominic B. King, and Robert Peabody--
Senators Birch Bayh, John Glenn, H. John Heinz III, Jennings Ran-
dolph, and Howard Metzenbaum, letters---
OVERSIGHT OF THE ANTIDUMPING ACT OF 1921
TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 8, 1977
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES,
Today's hearing is the first of what will be a series of hearings continuing until next year on the administration of the Nation's unfair trade practices laws. We have scheduled all of our witnesses today contrary to our previous notice. There will be no hearing tomorrow.
The record will be open until November 21.
Also, there are a number of witnesses, so in order to have maximum time for questioning, oral statements will be limited to 5 minutes.
I believe that most observers would agree that in the past the antidumping laws have been extremely ineffective. Today's hearing will bring out just how ineffective the past. administration of the law has been.
As Congressmen Rostenkowski, Steiger, and myself wrote to Secretary Blumenthal on October 13, concerning the Zenith case, “it åppears to us that a burden of proof rests with the Treasury Department that its failure in the Zenith antidumping case—has resulted in a loss of domestic production facilities and jobs which should have never been lost."
This is an oversight hearing, not a legislative hearing. But, we are seeking ideas and suggestions from the general public about ways the operation of the laws could be more effective and cases can proceed more quickly. At the same time, the law must be fair to our trading partners, and it must be perceived as such. The due process safeguards must be preserved.
I am concerned that so-called aggressive enforcement of the antidumping laws will be misunderstood overseas as meaning that cases are already decided in favor of the domestic producers and that America is erecting a massive nontrade barrier, which in the case of steel, could result in an embargo of all foreign steel from the country. Pursuing antidumping aggressively, if carried out unfairly, or if others believe it is carried out unfairly, could result in trade retaliation.