Washington, Jul 17, 2001 - Good morning, Mr. Chairman and members of the Commission. I appreciate the opportunity to speak with you today, although I regret the necessity. Just two years ago, you found that imports of hot-rolled steel from Brazil, Japan and Russia had materially injured the U.S. steel industry. As a result of that decision, prices began to recover in 1999 and early 2000, and my constituents began to breathe a little easier. Unfortunately, the industry experienced nothing more than a brief lull in an ongoing storm of unfairly traded imports.

What happened? Trading companies quickly found new countries with excess capacity nurtured in closed home markets by massive subsidies. That they did so is perhaps unsurprising. Indeed, the July 2000 Global Steel Trade study by the Department of Commerce explicitly identified China and India – two of the countries now under investigation – as "potential threats to the global steel market's stability, particularly given the continued aid of their respective governments."

I won't belabor each instance of unfair trading – it should be enough to note the Department of Commerce has found dumping margins as high as 239% and countervailing duty rates as high as 40% in these cases. Our domestic industry simply cannot sustain repeated blows of such unfairly traded goods.

That the blows have been repeated is a testament to the fact that the globe is awash in uneconomic steel resulting from massive excess capacity. The administration correctly has recognized that this has caused a real crisis in the steel industry, and recently initiated a Section 201 proceeding.

But relief under Section 201 is still months away. The industry needs action now. The depth of the crisis is such that we need to make full use of all available trade remedies. Indeed, maintenance of a viable battery of trade remedies is generally recognized as an essential component of maintaining a U.S. consensus favoring expanding trade – an especially important consideration as we in Congress consider whether to renew trade promotion authority, and the world decides whether to launch a new round of trade negotiations. In this regard, I recall that the steel industry supported the Uruguay Round. I call on the Commission not to deny the industry the benefit of the trade laws Congress has specifically designed to prevent unfair trade.

The industry has not only supported increased trade, but has also done its part to ensure its continuing competitiveness. Since 1980, the industry's workforce has been reduced by nearly two-thirds, while the productivity of today's steelworkers is nearly three times greater than in 1980. At great pain to individuals, families and communities, the industry closed scores of facilities, while upgrading remaining facilities through wholesale adoption of innovative technologies. However, foreign uneconomic capacity and massive unfair trade have prevented the U.S. steel industry from reaping the benefit of the long and expensive restructuring it has undergone. Indeed, the spate of recent bankruptcies in this industry is shocking.

The U.S. steel industry is injured. It needs relief, and it needs it now. Your careful examination of the data you have gathered can lead you to no other conclusion than that the domestic hot-rolled industry has been materially injured – a conclusion which is already far, far too obvious to my constituents