U.S.
Industry Lauds Congressional Call
for
Separate WTO Textile Negotiations and
Vietnam
Safeguard
and
Praises Congressional
Supporters for Drawing Link
Between Action on Those
Issues and Future Trade Votes
June
13, 2006
For Immediate
Release
WASHINGTON,
DC
– Today, forty-four (44)
U.S.
Representatives wrote U.S. Trade Representative
(USTR)
Ambassador Susan Schwab and called for (1)
separate sectoral negotiations for textiles in the
ongoing World Trade Organization (WTO) Doha Round
talks, and (2) an adequate textile safeguard as a
condition for admitting
Vietnam
into the WTO. They also
conveyed that failure to address those concerns
would “substantially impact” their view of trade
legislation from this point
forward.
“We
thank the Members who signed this letter for their
strong expression of support for the
U.S.
textile industry. In
addition, House Textile Caucus Co-Chairs Howard
Coble (R-NC) and John Spratt (D-SC) deserve
special recognition for their tireless leadership
and organizing efforts. The
letter’s two requests are crucial to the long-term
health and survival of the
U.S.
textile industry,” said the major national trade
groups representing the
U.S.
textile industry – the American Manufacturing
Trade Action Coalition (AMTAC), National Council
of Textile Organizations (NCTO), and National
Textile Association
(NTA).
The
latest Doha Round text calls for unbalanced
reductions in
U.S.
industrial tariffs compared to so-called
developing countries like
China. The only
way to exempt textiles from this proposed
commitment is to create a separate negotiating
sectoral in the non-agricultural market access
(NAMA) portion of the Doha talks.
“A
textile sectoral is a ‘must-have’ for the
U.S.
textile industry and the
U.S.
government must demand one now before they lose
the opportunity. A
sectoral is the only realistic way to save the
tariffs and safeguards that stand as the last line
of defense for the U.S. textile industry and its
preferential trade partners in Latin America and
Africa against unfair trade practices from
non-market economies like China and Vietnam,” said
AMTAC, NCTO and NTA.
The
letter also addresses how
Vietnam
uses China’s
formula of predatory non-market economics,
subsidies, and pennies-per-hour labor to steal
business away from
U.S.
companies playing by the rules. These
unfair policies have allowed
Vietnam
to seize an additional $3 billion in
U.S.
textile and apparel import market share since
2001.
AMTAC, NCTO, and NTA stated, “The failure
to include an adequate textile safeguard in the
recently signed WTO accession agreement between
the United
States
and Vietnam
is unacceptable. The
U.S.
government can and must exercise its power to
rectify this job-destroying flaw prior to the
finalization of
Vietnam’s
accession.”
Finally,
solving the two problems outlined in the Textile
Caucus letter are critical because the U.S.
textile industry effectively
lacks legal standing
to use anti-dumping and countervailing duty
defenses against dumped and illegally subsidized
imports.
For a variety of reasons, producers in the
textile supply chain, the bulk of the
U.S.
textile industry, are precluded from filing
anti-dumping suits for all practical
purposes.
Moreover, the ability to seek penalty
tariffs is also unavailable to the industry
because the U.S. Commerce Department has
determined that it will not apply countervailing
duty law to non-market economies like
China
and Vietnam.
Recognizing
this unique
handicap, AMTAC, NCTO and NTA
concluded, “It is imperative
that effective
trade remedies be included in both
Vietnam's
WTO accession agreement and as part of any
ultimate Doha Round package. Absent
such action, expect
China
and Vietnam
to keep cheating until they eliminate all other
significant
U.S.
and foreign competition in the
U.S.
market.”
Since
January 2001, employment in the
U.S.
textile and apparel manufacturing has fallen from
1,047,200 to 617,700. The loss
of 429,500 jobs represents a 41 percent
decline.
Signatories
on the congressional letter to
USTR
are listed below by state.
Republicans are in regular font. Democrats
in italic. The
letter’s sponsors are in
bold.
