CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - HOUSE October 14, 1978

formula, quotas could have been relaxed

only once in the last ten years.

I also believe that the United States

must avoid Imposing excessive restrictions on our trading partners who supply

us with meat. H.R. 11545 would impose

those restrictions by stipulating a mini- mum access level for meat imports of 1.2

billion pounds, instead of the 1.3 billion

my Administration recommended. I am concerned that the bill's lower level could

harm our trade relations with the meat

exporting countries and thus impair

their long-term reliability as sources of

additional meat supplies when our own production is low, particularly at a time

when we are negotiating, for greater ac- cess to foreign markets for both our industrial and agricultural products.

If the Congress had enacted H.R. 11545

without these objectionable provisions,

I would have been pleased to sign it, as my advisers make clear repeatedly. The

bill would have amended the Meat Import Act of 1964 to provide a new formula

for determining meat import quotas. The new formula would have adjusted meat

import quotas up when domestic production of meats subject to the quota-went

down. Under the 1964 meat import law,

quotas are adjusted in the opposite way, so that as domestic production declines,

the limits on meat imports are tightened,

at exactly the wrong time. This defect

has often compelled Presidents to in- crease or suspend the meat import quota,

in order to ensure supplies of meat at

reasonable prices. The new countercyclical formula would, in most years, automatically make the necessary adjustment in the meat import quota, without involving the President in the normal

operation of the meat trade.

This Administration supports such

counter-cyclical management of meat

imports; In fact, the Department of Agriculture was instrumental in developing

the formula which the Congress ap- proved. But for all the advantages of the new formula, it is still an untestea

mechanical formula which may not re- spond ideally to all future situations.

This is why I find the restrictions on the

President's discretion to increase meat

imports so objectionable and why my

Administration's support for H.R. 11545 was so clearly conditioned upon removal

of those restrictions and on increasing the minimum access level for meat imports to 1.3 billion pounds annually.

I am prepared to work with the Congress next year to pass a counter-cyclical

meat import bill which will provide the

stability and certainty .the cattle industry requires, while preserving the President's existing discretionary authority

and setting an acceptable minimum access level for imports. JIMMY CARTER.

THE WroTE HOUSE, November 10, 1978.

. H.R. 9937

MEMORANDUM OF DISAPPROVAL

I have decided not to sign Into law

H.R. 9937. This bill is an amendment to

the Bank Holding Company Act which

would authorize the General Services

Administration to sell certain silver dollar coins at negotiated prices. I have determined that this legislation would not

be in the national interest because of an

unrelated amendment which exempts all

textile and apparel items from any tariff

reductions in the Multilateral Trade Negotiations (MTN) now underway in

Geneva.

I am determined to assist the beleaguered textile industry. We are committed to a healthy and growing textile and

apparel industry. This legislation would

not advance that cause, and could even harm the entire U.S. economy.

This bill would not address the real

causes of the industry's difficulties. In

return for any transient benefits, the bill

would prompt our trading partners to

retaliate by withdrawing offers in areas

where our need for export markets is the

greatest-products such as tobacco,

grains, citrus, raw cotton, paper, ma- chinery, poultry, and textile-related

areas such as mill products and fashion

clothing. The loss of these export areas

is too high a price for our Nation to pay.

The cost of this bill might be even higher; at best, it would cost us many

opportunities for exports; at worst, it

could cause the collapse of the trade

talks and further restrict the growth of

the world economy. If the two and a

quarter million workers in the textile

and apparel industry are to survive in

their jobs, we must work to keep the

world economy strong and international

trade free.

Just within the last year we have taken a number of steps to improve the

condition of the U.S. textile and apparel

industry:

-We negotiated a renewal of the International Multifiber Arrangement

through 1981, providing more responsive controls over disruptive

Imports.

-We have negotiated 15 new bilateral

export restraint agreements which

are firmer and fairer than earlier

versions, covering 80 percent of all

imports from low-cost suppliers.

And we are negotiating more.

-We have improved our monitoring of

imports and implementation of restraints, through steps such as the new legislative Initiatives I have

approved.

-We have, despite the proposed small

reduction in tariffs, the highest textile and apparel tariffs in the developed world.

-We have begun discussions with exporting countries not now under restraint to seek appropriate levels for

their shipments.

-We have established a pilot program

to improve productivity in the men's

tailored clothing Industry, and we have begun an export promotion

program for the entire textile and

apparel complex.

-And we have begun a review of existing and proposed Federal regulations

affecting this industry to assess their

impact.

This, however, is not enough. I pledge

that we will do more;

-We will intensify our review of existing bilateral restraint agreements to

be sure they really work, and if there

are harmful surges we will work

promptly to remedy them.

-We will not allow the effectiveness

of our restraint agreements to be

undermined by significant increases

in shipments from uncontrolled suppliers, and we will maintain a worldwide evaluation of the imports of

textile and apparel into the U.S.

and seek appropriate action, country-by-country, where warranted.

-We will be prepared to expand the

-pilot project underway in the men's

tailored clothing industry so that

other sectors may benefit from that

experience, and we will speed proposals for a similar program in the

ladies apparel industry.

-We will negotiate strenuously for

removal of non-tariff barriers to U.S

textile and apparel exports, including restrictive "rules of origin."

-The Office of the Special Representative for Trade Negotiations will

begin a new policy review and report

to me quarterly on developments in

the domestic textile and apparel industry, with special emphasis on imports and exports, so that appropriate actions can be taken more

promptly.

These steps, like those of the past year,

will not be the limit of our assistance to

this vital industry. But each step that

we take must be directed toward the

long-term health of this industry and

the United States economy as a wholeunlike H.R. 9937 which on balance is

detrimental to the textile industry, to its

two million workers, and to the Nation

as a whole. JIMMY CARTER.

THE WHITE HousE, November 10, 1978.

H.R. 9370

MEMORANDUM OF DISAPPROVAL

I have withheld approval from H.R.

9370, "A bill to establish new Federal programs and assistance for the development of aquaculture in the United

States."

While the underlying purpose of the

bill, development of an active aquaculture industry, is sound, I am concerned

that the numerous broad-reaching programs established under the bill are premature. H.R. 9370 would establish a National Aquaculture Council to assess the

state of aquaculture in the U.S. and to

prepare a National Aquaculture Development Plan-a detailed set of Federal activities to expand the commercial potential of certain aquatic species. It would

establish substantial new programs of

Federal assistance t6 carry out the plan

and undertake demonstration projects in

aquaculture. The bill also would create a

Federal Aquaculture Assistance Fund to

provide financial assistance and support

to the aquaculture industry through a

new Federal loan guarantee program and

a new Federal insurance program.

The Administration recognizes the importance of aquaculture, the need for

effective programs to support this, and

the concept of an assessment of the

aquaculture industry. In fact, many of

the actions that the bill would require

are already underway. Federal agencies

are now involved in a wide variety of

aquaculture activities, and they already

have the legislative authorities they need

38786