852 October 14

ports when, in his judgment, domestic 

supplies are inadequate to meet demand 

at reasonable prices. I am convinced that 

this flexibility must be preserved, as a 

weapon against inflation.

Under this bill, however, authority to 

increase meat imports would be tied to 

declaration of a national emergency or 

natural disaster, or to a restrictive price 

formula. Under this formula, the farm 

price of cattle would have to increase 

faster than the retail meat price by more 

than ten percent during the first two 

calendar quarters of a year. Under this 

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 minimum 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 

access 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 increase or suspend 

the meat import quota, in order to ensure 

supplies of meat at reasonable prices. 

The new counter-cyclical 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 

approved. But for all the advantages of 

the new formula, it is still an untested 

mechanical formula which may not 

respond 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

JOURNAL OF THE SENATE

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.

J i m m y C a r t e r .

T h e W h i t e H o u s e , November 10, 1978.

The President of the United States, 

subsequent to the sine die adjournment 

of the Second Session of the 95th Congress, transmitted to the Secretary of 

the Senate, on Wednseday, November 15, 

1978, a record of additional bills disapproved by him, with his reasons for 

such actions, as follows:

g o v e r n m e n t i n d e m n i f i c a t i o n f o r l o s s e s

AS A RESULT OF THE FEDERAL BAN ON

SLEEPWEAR TREATED W ITH TRIS

I am withholding my approval of S. 

1503, a bill which would authorize Government indemnification, upon a judgment by the U.S. Court of Claims, of 

businesses which sustained losses as a 

result of the ban on the use of the 

chemical Tris in children’s sleepwear.

In 1971 and 1974 the Government established strict fabric flammability 

standards on children’s sleepwear to protect children against burns. To meet 

these flammability standards, the clothing industry treated fabric by using substantial quantities of the flame-retardant chemical Tris. In 1975, information 

became available that Tris was a carcinogenic risk to humans. Some firms 

stopped using Tris after this test information became available, but other firms 

did not.

On April 8, 1977, the Consumer Product Safety Commission ruled that children’s sleepwear containing Tris was 

banned as a “hazardous substance” under the Federal Hazardous Substances 

Act. This led to the removal of Tristreated children’s sleepwear from the 

marketplace. Both the imposition of 

flammability standards and the subsequent ban on Tris-treated fabrics have 

caused expenditures and losses by industry.

The imposition of strict flammability 

standards to protect the Nation’s children was fully justified. After it was discovered that Tris was hazardous to 

health, the removal of Tris-treated sleepwear from the marketplace, again to 

protect the Nation’s children, was also 

fully justified.

S. 1503 would establish an unprecedented and unwise use of taxpayer’s 

funds to indemnify private companies 

for losses incurred as a result of compliance with a federal standard. The Government could be placed in the position 

in the future of having to pay industry 

each time new information arises which 

shows that a product used to meet regulatory standards is hazardous. This 

would be wrong. Producers and retailers 

have a basic responsibility for insuring 

the safety of the consumer goods they 

market.

If this bill became law the potential 

would exist for compensation of firms 

who marketed Tris-treated material 

after they knew, or should have known, 

that such products constituted a hazard 

to the health of children. Extensive,

costly, and time-consuming litigation 

would be required to determine, in each 

instance, the liability involved and the 

loss attributable to the ban action in 

April 1977, without regard to profits the 

claimants may have earned on Tristreated garments in earlier years.

While it is most regrettable that losses 

have resulted from the regulatory actions 

taken to protect the safety and health of 

the Nation’s children, no basis exists to 

require a potential Federal expenditure 

of millions of dollars when the actions 

of the Government were fully justified. 

Accordingly, I am compelled to withhold 

my approval from this bill.

J i m m y Carter.

FEDERAL PAYMENTS TO OFFSET CERTAIN

LOSSES IN REVENUE IN GUAM AND THE

VIRGIN ISLANDS

I have withheld my approval of H.R. 

13719, which would have authorized special Federal payments to Guam and the 

Virgin Islands to offset the local revenue 

losses during calendar years 1978 

through 1982 caused by the Revenue Act 

of 1978.

Because income taxes paid by territorial residents to the governments of 

Guam and the Virgin Islands are based 

on the U.S. Internal Revenue Code, tax 

changes intended to reduce Federal income tax liabilities in the United States 

have a corresponding effect in reducing 

territorial tax liabilities. H.R. 13719 

would have authorized direct grants to 

the territories to offset revenue losses 

associated with the 1978 tax Act.

While recognizing the defects in the 

current territorial tax structures which 

H.R. 13719 was designed to alleviate, 

particularly the effects of periodic Federal tax reductions on local revenues, I 

do not believe the bill provides an acceptable long-range solution. By replacing reasonable local tax efforts with direct Federal payments, the bill is simply 

another attempt to manage territorial 

deficits without addressing the underlying economic and financial problems 

which have led to those deficits. We can 

no longer afford a piecemeal approach 

to the growing revenue problems of the 

territories.

Accordingly, although I am disapproving H.R. 13719,1 am directing the Secretaries of the Interior and the Treasury to 

study the financial situation of both the 

Virgin Islands and Guam and to recommend a plan designed to help those governments achieve a higher degree of 

financial stability without perpetuating 

a piecemeal system which is costly to the 

Federal government and which does not 

sufficiently encourage responsible financial management in these territories.

J i m m y Carter.

MAILING OF FOREIGN LOTTERY MATERIAL

The President of the United States, 

subsequent to the sine die adjournment 

of the 2d session of the 95th Congress, 

notified the Secretary of the Senate, on 

Wednesday, November 15, 1978, that he 

had disapproved the bill (H.R. 11580) to 

amend title 18, United States Code, to 

allow the transportation or mailing to a 

foreign country of material concerning a 

lottery authorized by the foreign country, 

and for other purposes.
1978 JOURNAL OF THE SENATE 853

APPOINTMENT SUBSEQUENT TO SINE DIE

ADJOURNMENT

NATIONAL ALCOHOL FUELS COMMISSION

Subsequent to the sine die adjournment of the Senate,

The PRESIDENT pro tempore, on 

November 22, 1978, appointed Mr. Bayh

as Chairman of the National Alcohol 

Fuels Commission.

REPORT OF SELECT COMMITTEE ON SMALL

BUSINESS SUBSEQUENT TO SINE DIE

ADJOURNMENT

Subsequent to the sine die adjournment of the Senate,

Under the authority of the order of 

Sunday, October 15, 1978,

On Thursday, December 28, 1978, Mr.

N e l s o n , from the Select Committee on 

Small Business, submitted a report (No. 

95-1413) entitled “Small Business and 

Innovation—Report of the Select Committee on Small Business, United States 

Senate, on Underutilization of Small 

Business in the Nation’s Efforts to Encourage Industrial Innovation” ; which 

was printed.