IV 
109TH CONGRESS 
1ST SESSION 
H. RES. 577 
Expressing the sense of the House of Representatives regarding the conditions 
for the United States to become a signatory to any multilateral agree-
ment on trade resulting from the World Trade Organization’s Doha 
Development Agenda Round. 
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 
NOVEMBER 18, 2005 
Mr. ENGLISH of Pennsylvania (for himself, Mr. REYNOLDS, and Ms. HART) 
submitted the following resolution; which was referred to the Committee 
on Ways and Means 
RESOLUTION 
Expressing the sense of the House of Representatives regard-
ing the conditions for the United States to become a 
signatory to any multilateral agreement on trade result-
ing from the World Trade Organization’s Doha Develop-
ment Agenda Round. 
Whereas members of the World Trade Organization (WTO) 
are currently engaged in a round of trade negotiations 
known as the Doha Development Agenda (Doha Round); 
Whereas the Doha Round includes negotiations aimed at 
clarifying and improving disciplines under the Agreement 
on Implementation of Article VI of the General Agree-
ment on Tariffs and Trade 1994 (Antidumping Agree-
•HRES 577 IH 
ment) and the Agreement on Subsidies and Counter-
vailing Measures (Subsidies Agreement); 
Whereas the WTO Ministerial Declaration adopted on No-
vember 14, 2001 (WTO Paper No. WT/MIN(01)/DEC/ 
1), specifically provides that the Doha Round negotia-
tions are to preserve the ‘‘basic concepts, principles and 
effectiveness’’ of the Antidumping Agreement and the 
Subsidies Agreement; 
Whereas in section 2102(b)(14)(A) of the Bipartisan Trade 
Promotion Authority Act of 2002, the Congress man-
dated that the principal negotiating objective of the 
United States with respect to trade remedy laws was to 
‘‘preserve the ability of the United States to enforce rig-
orously its trade laws . . . and avoid agreements that 
lessen the effectiveness of domestic and international dis-
ciplines on unfair trade, especially dumping and sub-
sidies’’; 
Whereas the countries that have been the most persistent and 
egregious violators of international fair trade rules are 
engaged in an aggressive effort to significantly weaken 
the disciplines provided in the Antidumping Agreement 
and the Subsidies Agreement and undermine the ability 
of the United States to effectively enforce its trade rem-
edy laws; 
Whereas chronic violators of fair trade disciplines have put 
forward proposals that would substantially weaken 
United States trade remedy laws and practices, including 
mandating that unfair trade orders terminate after a set 
number of years even if unfair trade and injury are likely 
to recur, mandating that trade remedy duties reflect less 
than the full margin of dumping or subsidization, man-
dating higher de minimis levels of unfair trade, making
•HRES 577 IH 
cumulation of the effects of imports from multiple coun-
tries more difficult in unfair trade investigations, out-
lawing the critical practice of ‘‘zeroing’’ in antidumping 
investigations, mandating the weighing of causes, and 
mandating other provisions that make it more difficult to 
prove injury; 
Whereas United States trade remedy laws have already been 
significantly weakened by numerous unjust and activist 
WTO dispute settlement decisions which have created 
new obligations to which the United States never agreed; 
Whereas trade remedy laws remain a critical resource for 
American manufacturers, agricultural producers, and 
aquacultural producers in responding to closed foreign 
markets, subsidized imports, and other forms of unfair 
trade, particularly in the context of the challenges cur-
rently faced by these vital sectors of the United States 
economy; 
Whereas the United States had a current account trade def-
icit of approximately $668,000,000,000 in 2004, includ-
ing a trade deficit of almost $162,000,000,000 with 
China 
alone, 
as 
well 
as 
a 
trade 
deficit 
of 
$40,000,000,000 in advanced technology; 
Whereas United States manufacturers have lost over 
3,000,000 jobs since June 2000, and United States man-
ufacturing employment is currently at its lowest level 
since 1950; 
Whereas many industries critical to United States national 
security are at severe risk from unfair foreign competi-
tion; and 
Whereas the House of Representatives strongly believes that 
the proposals put forward by countries seeking to under-
•HRES 577 IH 
mine trade remedy disciplines in the Doha Round would 
result in serious harm to the United States economy, in-
cluding significant job losses and trade disadvantages: 
Now, therefore, be it 
Resolved, That it is the sense of the House of Rep-
resentatives that— 
(1) the United States should not be a signatory 
to any agreement or protocol with respect to the 
Doha Development Round of the World Trade Orga-
nization negotiations, or any other bilateral or multi-
lateral trade negotiations, that— 
(A) adopts any proposal to lessen the effec-
tiveness of domestic and international dis-
ciplines on unfair trade or safeguard provisions, 
including proposals— 
(i) mandating that unfair trade orders 
terminate after a set number of years even 
if unfair trade and injury are likely to 
recur; 
(ii) mandating that trade remedy du-
ties reflect less than the full margin of 
dumping or subsidization; 
(iii) mandating higher de minimis lev-
els of unfair trade;
•HRES 577 IH 
(iv) making cumulation of the effects 
of imports from multiple countries more 
difficult in unfair trade investigations; 
(v) outlawing the critical practice of 
‘‘zeroing’’ in antidumping investigations; or 
(vi) mandating the weighing of causes 
or other provisions making it more difficult 
to prove injury in unfair trade cases; or 
(B) would lessen in any manner the ability 
of the United States to enforce rigorously its 
trade laws, including the antidumping, counter-
vailing duty, and safeguard laws; 
(2) the United States trade laws and inter-
national rules appropriately serve the public interest 
by offsetting injurious unfair trade, and further 
‘‘balancing modifications’’ or other similar provisions 
are unnecessary and would add to the complexity 
and difficulty of achieving relief against injurious 
unfair trade practices; and 
(3) the United States should ensure that any 
new agreement relating to international disciplines 
on unfair trade or safeguard provisions fully rectifies 
and corrects decisions by WTO dispute settlement 
panels or the Appellate Body that have unjustifiably 
and negatively impacted, or threaten to negatively