May 24, 1965
PAGE 11345
INTRODUCTION OF S.2022, THE ORDERLY MARKETING ACT OF 1965
Mr. MUSKIE. Mr. President, I introduce, for appropriate reference, for myself and Senators CLARK, DODD, EASTLAND, ERVIN, HARTKE, KENNEDY Of Massachusetts, MCINTYRE, and PELL, a bill to provide for the orderly marketing of articles imported into the United States, to establish a flexible basis for the adjustment by the U.S. economy to expanded trade, and to afford foreign supplying nations a fair share of the growth or change in the U.S. market. I ask unanimous consent that the bill remain at the desk for 10 days for additional cosponsors.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
Mr. MUSKIE. Mr. President, this proposed legislation, "The Orderly Marketing Act of 1965," is designed to protect those industries injured or threatened with injury by a massive flood of low-cost imports. In a number of industries, particularly those with a high labor input, we find that low-wage foreign competition arises quickly, expands rapidly and threatens the existence of domestic manufacturers and workers before they have an opportunity to adjust to the new competition.
We have seen this happen in textiles, in footwear manufacturing, and in wood products manufacturing. These are industries where profit margins have been narrow and where many manufacturers have had limited capital resources. High tariffs do not offer meaningful or desirable relief for those industries. Rigid quota systems would undermine our efforts to increase the general level of international trade.
In the Trade Expansion Act we attempted to develop the concept of flexible quotas as an answer to this problem. It was contained in the orderly marketing amendment to that act. The difficulty has been that the definition of injury, attributable to imports, has been too unrealistic to afford meaningful relief. The procedure for finding injury is cumbersome and time-consuming. It does not take into account the peculiar nature of current volatile trade conditions in those industries I have mentioned and others.
We recognize the need for expanded world trade, But we do not think it makes sense for our workers or industrialists or, in the long run, for industrialists and workers in other countries to depend on erratic, unstable trade developments as a vehicle for economic growth. In our domestic markets we use a number of devices, including minimum wage-and-hours laws, for example, to insure fair competition. We cannot apply similar requirements on foreign countries.
The orderly marketing concept allows us to bring balance to our trade policy. It allows us to overcome unfair competition, through international agreements or through unilateral-but flexible quotas. And it allows foreign competitors to share in the growth of our economy. It is, in my opinion, a reasonable approach to a difficult and thorny problem.
I ask unanimous consent that the bill be printed in the RECORD at this point, together with a section-by-section analysis of the bill. I urge my colleagues to give serious consideration to cosponsorship of this legislation which is designed to help American workers and businessmen to meet foreign competition on equal terms.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The bill will be received and appropriately referred; and, without objection, the bill and section-by-section analysis will be printed in the RECORD.
The bill (S. 2022) to provide for the orderly marketing of articles imported into the United States, to establish a flexible basis for the adjustment by the United States economy to expanded trade, and to afford foreign supplying nations a fair share of the growth or change in the U.S. market, introduced by Mr. MUSKIE (for himself and other Senators), was received, read twice by its title, referred to the Committee on Finance, and ordered to be printed in the RECORD, as follows: