페이지 이미지

world including Russia, I am convinced that the greatest threat of world eonqu by the U. S. 8. R. lies not so much by military as by economic means.

Any views based on Russian operation to date will badly underestimate near future capabilities to trade with the rest of the world and provide techni assistance to go therewith. Aside from the few countries of northwestern Euro who like the United States are bound to democracy through heredity and suce* most of the countries of the world are so in need of increased living stand* that they will turn to whatever country furnished them the best means for tra Russia is about to attempt to do this.

Were we to use the Trade Agreements Act to reduce the ability of other coi tries of the world to trade with us, we would gain a pyrrhic victory. We mu temporarily help a few United States companies, but country after country wol follow the lead of Nasser and draw closer to the U. S. S. R. to the ultimate pi detriment of ourselves.

Were tariffs on X-ray equipment to be reduced it might reduce the profitsbii of Picker X-Ray. Yet, I am convinced that we in America are clever enough be able to compete successfully with the other countries of the world. If we; not, then our much vaunted capitalistic system is not as good as we tell 1 world it is.

I am convinced that Picker X-Ray and the United States are better off fro competing with the other countries of the world than we are having a very lai part of the world market ultimately closed to us as China, North Korea, ('.-•• I Slovakia, Poland, etc., have been—or as the Arabian countries may well be.

Because I think it is in the enlightened long-range self-interest of our compa and country, let me urge favorable action on this bill, preferably eliminating I escape clause to increase the tariff 50 percent above the 1934 level and the p vision permitting Congress to override the President's decisions.

Resolution By The North Atlantic Ports Association Supporting T Extension Op The Reciprocal Trade Program, Adopted On Fbu> October 11, 1957

Whereas the reciprocal trade program has withstood successfully the teat almost a quarter-century's operation in promoting and stimulating intematio trade throughout the free world to the economic betterment of our own i friendly foreign nations; and

Whereas reciprocal trade among nations is a necessary factor for world pn and security; and

Whereas working within the framework of the reciprocal trade program, j United States has greatly increased the worldwide exchange of goods and servi and expanded and protected its own markets abroad for United States produ through reciprocal adjustment of tariff and trade barriers, with the result th.it 1956 the total value of United States exports and imports exceeded $30 billii and

Whereas it is an established principle of trade that nations and peoples burl from the United States must also sell to the United States if mutual benefit* I to be achieved; and

Whereas the reciprocal trade program has been reenacted 10 times bv \ Federal Congress since its original passage in 1934 and the law has been gradua limited and weakened by restrictive provisions in recent years: and

Whereas the preservation of this beneficial and productive program if paramount importance to the further achievement and maintenance of C continuing peace and economic security of our own and the other free natfo of the world: Be it therefore

Resolved, That the North Atlantic Ports Association request the Fedfl Congress to authorize a 10-year renewal of the reciprocal trade program bey* June 30, 1958, and register its strong opposition to current efforts to fore* retreat by the Federal Government to a tariff program which would serious restrict foreign markets for United States trade with the consequent undermiw of our national economy; be it further

Resolved, That trade, commercial, civic, economic, and cultural interests urged to join in this effort to save and extend the reciprocal trade program, »i thus preserve the keystone of our foreign-trade policy which has had the suppd of both great political parties for more than -" _> decades.

League or Women Voters Of Montgomery County,

Slitter Spring, Md., June 28, 1968. Senate Finance Committee,

Senate Office Building, Washington, D. C. (Attention of Elizabeth B. Springer.) Gentlemen: In lieu of an appearance before your committee, the League of Women Voters of Montgomery County would like to go on record in favor of H. R. 12591.

Having j'-st completed a st"dy of world trade in relation to the United States and the vario"s instrumentalities for handling it, O'.r membership overwhelmingly believes that no bill more restrictive than H. R. 12591 would serve the general welfare of o-ir people and the Nation.

If any changes are to be made in this bill, we would like to see them in the direction of freer trade. We parti.i"larly urge the retention of the 5-year feature and the final authority of the President in escape-clause cases and emphasize our concern that no crippling amendments be added. Yours very truly,

Gretchen W. Casey

Mrs. Thomas G. Casey, President.

Office Of The Secretary Of The Treasury,

Washington, June 80, 1958. Hon. Harry F. Byrd,

Chairman, Committee on Finance,

United States Senate, Washington, D. C. My Dear Mr. Chairman: Reference is made to your letter of June 13, 1958, requesting the views of this Department on H. R. 12591, to extend the authority of the President to enter into trade agreements under section 350 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended, and for other purposes.

The proposed lecnslation would extend for a period of 5 years, that is, until the close of June 30, 1963, the authority of the President to enter into foreign trade agreements under section 350 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended.

This Department strongly recommends the enactment of H. R. 12591 in its present form.

The Department has been advised by the Bureau of the Budget that there is no objection to the submission of this report to your committee. Very truly yours,

Fred C. Scribner, Jr., Acting Secretary of the Treasury.

(Whereupon, at 5;45 p. m., the committee adjourned to reconvene at 10 a. m. Tuesday, June 24, 1958.)


Tuesday, June 24, 1958

United States Senate,
Committee On Finance,

Washington, D. C.

The committee met, pursuant to recess, at 10 a. m., in room 312 Senate Office Building, Senator Harry Flood Byrd (chairman) presiding.

Present: Senators Byrd (chairman), Kerr, Long, Anderson, Douglas, Gore, Martin, Williams, Flanders, Malone, Carlson, Bennett, and Jenner.

Also present: Elizabeth B. Springer, chief clerk.

The Chairman'. The meeting will come to order.

Senator Kerr. Mr. Chairman, I have the pleasure this morning of presenting to the committee Mr. W. A. Delaney, Jr., of Ada, Okla., who is scheduled to appear before the committee at a later date, but who has had a business trip and a trip with his family scheduled to Europe for some weeks and leaves tomorrow, and I certainly appreciate the indulgence of the committee in letting him appear here this morning and having his statement appear in the record of July 3, the date he ■was scheduled to appear along with other witnesses who will testify on the oil imports.

Mr. Delaney is accompanied by Congressman John Jarman of Oklahoma, of the Fifth District.

Did you want to accompany the witness up here, Mr. Jarman?

The Chairman. Mr. Delaney and Mr. Jarman, if you would come forward, please.

Mr. Jarman. Thank you, Senator.

The Chairman. Gentlemen, we are pleased to have you.

You may proceed, sir.

Senator Kerr. I will explain to Mr. Delaney that the time of the committee would not permit the reading of his entire statement and will tell him he can summarize it and put his entire statement in the record, Mr. Chairman, if that is agreeable.

The Chairman. The procedure will be agreeable.

(Mr. Delaney's oral remarks and prepared statement appear as part of the proceedings of the hearing on July 3.)

The Chairman. The first witness is Mr. Harry S. Radcliffe.



Mr. Radcliffe. My name is Harry S. Radcliffe, and I am the esi tive vice president of the National Council of American Impor with headquarters at 45 East 17th Street, New York City.

I appear this morning in favor of the extension of the Recipfl Trade Agreement Act and in order to give the approval of our ganization to the pending bill, H. R. 12591, with some changes \ we hope will make a constructive improvement in the bill.

Although the National Council of American Importers has at cated that in these critical times the program be given stability bj 11-year extension, we now strongly support the proposed 5-year tension.

We do, however, respectfully submit that in view of the antidp* developments arising from establishment of the European Cony Market and the possible creation of free trade areas in Europe other parts of the world that 5 years should be the minimum pel for the extension of the act.

We also support the proposed new bargaining authority permit1 the gradual reduction of tariff rates by 25 percent of the rates in el on July 1,1958; or, alternatively, by 2 percentage points; or, if hi< than 50 percent ad valorem or its equivalent, down to that tariff 1<

We oppose, however, two features now in the bill:

(1) The provisions permitting a sudden increase as a result o: escape clause case of any existing rate to a duty rate 50 percent his than the rate which was in effect on July 1,1934.

(2) The provision authorizing the President to establish a dut1 a rate not in excess of 50 percent ad valorem on articles which are of duty.

As to the proposal to authorize duty rates to be increased 50 pen above the July 1, 1934, rates, we wish to point out that those rate? with few exceptions, the Hawley-Smoot traff rates of 1930.

Where a given rate was reduced by the full 50 percent author by the original Trade Agreements Act of 1934, and by anodic percent authorized by the act of 1945, and by an additional 15 per authorized by the act of 1955, the rate that will be in effect on Jul 1958, represents 21^4 percent of the July 1,1934 rate.

An increase from 21*4 to 150 percent of the July 1,1934, rate m a sudden rise in the duty rate of slightly over 700 percent.

To subject any rate of duty that has been reduced by trade s£l ment negotiations since 1934 to an increase, as a result of an oa clause investigation, to a protective level 50 percent above the no* ously high Hawley-Smoot rates is a preposterous proposition.

Under such an intolerable situation, even a rumor in the market t a domestic industry was thinking of making an application to Tariff Commission under the escape clause would cause importer run for cover.

I can assure this committee that the adoption of such a drastic} vision will cause so much uncertainty among importers that it sto to reason that our import volume will be adversely affected.

When that happens, our export trade volume is bound to su a corresponding degree at the very time when the contribution t

« 이전계속 »