Posted on 05/13/2005 6:05:53 PM PDT by AntiGuv
WASHINGTON - The Bush administration is re-imposing quotas on three categories of clothing imports from China, responding to complaints from domestic producers that a surge of Chinese imports was threatening thousands of U.S. jobs.
The administration action will impose limits on the amount of cotton trousers, cotton knit shirts and underwear that China can ship to this country. American retailers say that will drive up prices for U.S. consumers.
In announcing the decision Friday, Commerce Secretary Carlos Gutierrez said a government investigation had found that a surge in shipments from China since global quotas were eliminated on Jan. 1 was disrupting the domestic market.
The decision was made by the Committee for the Implementation of Textile Agreements, an interagency group led by the Commerce Department.
"Today's action by CITA demonstrates this administration's commitment to leveling the playing field for U.S. industry by enforcing our trade agreements," Gutierrez said in a statement.
The action will mean that shipments in the three categories will be permitted to increase this year by just 7.5 percent, compared with shipments over a 12-month base period.
U.S. retailers had fought against the re-imposition of quotas on China, arguing that it will mean higher costs for American consumers.
Laura Jones, executive director of the United States Association of Importers of Textiles and Apparel, said the administration was going ahead with the action even though the latest trade data showed that clothing and textile imports from China actually declined in March after surging in January and February. She said the administration chose to ignore all the comments filed by U.S. retailers arguing against the action.
"Clearly, the government did not consider the facts," she said. "To make a decision affecting billions of dollars in business less than four days after a public comment period closes only shows how little regard there is for our business."
In its announcement, the administration said four other petitions the industry filed last year seeking re-imposition of quotas in other clothing categories could be acted upon soon because the public comment period has now ended in those cases.
Jones predicted the administration will quickly process all the cases it has pending, including several cases the industry filed last month. She said the domestic industry was "trying to recreate the quota system."
But domestic textile and clothing makers argued that they faced the prospect of losing thousands of jobs unless something was done to stem the flow of products from China.
"The fast action to re-impose quotas by the Bush administration today has saved thousands of textile jobs in this country and we are extremely grateful," said Cass Johnson, president of the National Council of Textile Organizations. "The U.S. government has sent a strong message that it understands the real crisis that these enormous surges present to our workers."
Earlier this week, the council announced its support for the administration's drive to get Congress to pass the Central American Free Trade Agreement, covering the Dominican Republic and five Central American countries.
Critics of the trade pact have accused the administration of offering to re-impose quotas on Chinese textiles as a way of appeasing lawmakers from textile districts. The administration has said the textile cases would be decided on their merits.
The American Manufacturing Trade Action Coalition, another big textile industry group which refused to back CAFTA, praised the administration's action in the Chinese cases.
"Unfair trade practices like export tax rebates, non-performing loans, currency manipulation and other subsidies fuel China's export surge," said Auggie Tantillo, executive director of AMTAC. "Failure by the U.S. government to discourage these practices would make a mockery of America's free markets."
Tantillo said the textile industry would be filing more cases seeking re-imposition of quotas in the near future.
The United States has the power to impose caps of 7.5 percent growth in textile and clothing categories on China under an agreement that cleared the way for China's membership in the World Trade Organization in 2001.
Not for products 30 cent an hour workers can make competently. Actually, the wages in China are more like maybe $1.50, but that is irrelevant for purposes of this discussion.
Well, just keep in mind that what is "better" is also in the eye of the beholder.. ;^)
I always keep that in mind. :)
U.S. Re-Imposes Quotas on Chinese Clothing
Some low skill jobs are more productive in the information post industrial American economy than others. Textiles are in the "others" category.
It is not good to lose an entire industry's capability to a country that might not be our friend tomorrow.
One area I think America is going to really expand in is animal products, seeds and other agricultural products. Those Chinese and Indians are going to eat a lot of meat as they come out of total poverty.
As you say its a low skill job, but America is extremely productive at it. Unlike textiles which it seems we aren't very competitive at.
Credit cards companies are subsidizing us. Good.
That may be true for apparel, but the textile industry also encompasses making cloth, and the modern industry these days to make cloth is anything but "low skilled and labor intensive". The machinery to make cloth is generally made in Japan or Europe, and is expensive. (I just did a quick Google search, and it looks like the Indian companies are also trying to move into the business of selling this machinery too. Not surprising I guess since India is also a major textile manufacturer. I also saw some Chinese gear, but my assumption would be that those machines are just a crude, low-priced rip-off.)
Japan, which has comparable pay scales to the U.S. is still doing a good business making high quality cloth, and I think we can also. We even have a significant advantage over Japan in that we produce locally much of the inputs that they must import to produce textiles.
A good start?? Maybe not.
This is only going to limit the INCREASE to 7.5%. So, actually there will be more of these selected items coming in next year.
This reminds me of the story where the bully down the street beats up your kid every day, giving him a black eye and a bloody nose. You approach the bully and say "we've had enough". He says, "okay, tomorrow I'll only bloody his nose". Oh, thank you so much, we're "extremely grateful".
Meanwhile, President Bush (and the other Co-Presidents of the Americas) are meeting to pass CAFTA through and cripple what's left of the textile industry. Funny world, huh?
Thanks for the good post.
Quote: One area I think America is going to really expand in is animal products, seeds and other agricultural products. Those Chinese and Indians are going to eat a lot of meat as they come out of total poverty.
So you want our country to go from high paying hi-tech manufacturing jobs to lower paying agricultural jobs??
Also Indians don't eat cows. They worship them and the cows sh*t in their front yards. I worship cows differently: At places like Outback Steak house.
First agriculture isn't always a lower paying job. And there is a huge amount of jobs involved in the support of agriculture, like transportation, chemical fertilizer production etc..
But secondly America isn't producing enough high tech graduates to compete on the world level. Although certainly many high tech companies are based here, and even expanding to hire every one of the people who do graduate in those areas. To compete their main expansions have to be abroad.
We have an advantage right now in that we can raise capital to buy equipment. And in addition we can put them right next to the market, and most likely next to the design places.
"It is not good to lose an entire industry's capability to a country that might not be our friend tomorrow."
Amen to that!
Don't forget too that the more they export, the less poor the Chinese are going to be and someday they will get tired of doing all our work while we live at the top of the heap.
Sooner or later there aren't going to be any sources of low cost labor for us to depend on. I say we make it sooner so that we can learn how to go back to depending on ourselves in a controlled fashion rather than reacting to a crisis down the road.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.