Reduce those tariffs you silly hosers.
Posted on 12/22/2005 8:09:53 AM PST by hedgetrimmer
WASHINGTON, DC—Steve Swanson, Chairman of the Coalition for Fair Lumber Imports, announced today that the U.S. lumber industry is challenging the constitutionality of a dispute settlement system under the North American Free Trade Agreement, commonly referred to as Chapter 19. The Chapter 19 system allows bi-national panels of individuals to make binding decisions about application of U.S. law to U.S. unfair trade findings contrary to due process and other constitutional requirements.
“The Constitution does not permit these panels to be the final arbiter of whether U.S. law provides for relief from unfair subsidies and dumping for U.S. producers and workers,” said Swanson. “The challenge is against the Chapter 19 dispute mechanism, not the NAFTA as a whole.”
United States courts ordinarily decide appeals of findings that imports are subsidized or dumped. NAFTA Chapter 19 made findings regarding Canadian and Mexican imports appealable only to panels of individuals, some of whom are not U.S. citizens and none of whom is accountable within the U.S. government. Nothing like Chapter 19 has been included in other trade agreements, including DR-CAFTA.
When the Congress first considered Chapter 19 in 1988, the U.S. Justice Department warned that the Chapter 19 system would be unconstitutional. The U.S. government has repeatedly found that Canadian lumber imports are subsidized and dumped and threaten injury to the U.S. lumber industry. The World Trade Organization has approved these findings, and countervailing (anti-subsidy) and antidumping duties have been imposed on Canadian lumber imports since 2002. But a NAFTA dispute panel has exceeded its authority by directing the U.S. International Trade Commission to reverse a finding that unfair imports threaten the U.S. lumber industry. The U.S. government requested that one panelist be removed because of a conflict of interest, but he stayed on the panel.
“As NAFTA panels threaten to subvert application of the trade laws to unfair lumber imports, we must enforce our constitutional right to due process and accountable decision-making,” explained Swanson. “If Canadian lumber subsidies and dumping are not fully addressed, the unfair imports will result in scores of sawmill closures, cause thousands of job losses, and undermine millions of family timberland owners.” Swanson concluded, “All that the U.S. industry has ever requested is an end to Canadian lumber subsidies and dumping through open and competitive timber and log markets. The U.S. industry vigorously supports the U.S. government’s pursuit of free trade principles and a negotiated settlement based on reasonable Canadian commitments to timber policy reform. Until then, we will defend our rights to relief under U.S. law.”
The Coalition’s filing of this case comports with statutory requirements that it be initiated within 30 days of the end of a Chapter 19 proceeding.
These saps wanted it, now they got it...
Hey, I'm with you...I think we Americans should all ban together and refuse to buy anything made in America...American goods are far too expensive...
Now we will see whether there is any Constitutional honesty left in the Courts...
Apparently you missed the point. Lumber is such a small fraction of the cost of building a home that it is almost negligible.
Thanks for the ping. I was wondering how long this would take, seems we may find out how many Surpreme Court members
are CFR goons.
Dumping is one thing when it is the price of the good that is dumped. What about when it's the wage... nobody wants to talk about that forthrightly.
OMG LOL. You actually believe that? If I build a house, will you donate the lumber?
We have a Constitutional right to expensive lumber! To the barricades!
Nice to see you've re-discovered the folks at Public Citizen.
And yet the U.S. has ignored these binding decisions. I guess they don't have the force of U.S. law, do they?
Our representative government is protecting you from low cost Canadian lumber. You read about the tariffs, didn't you?
I just hope the U.N. doesn't tell us to drop these lumber tariffs.
The current softwood lumber dispute (Lumber IV) commenced in April of 2001. From May 22, 2002 to Dec 20, 2004 most Canadian softwood lumber exported to the US was subject to a combined countervailing and anti-dumping duty of 27%, collected by US Customs. From December 20, 2004 to December 12, 2005 the duties collected were 20%. On December 12, 2005, the duties collected at the border were reduced to 10.81%.
Government of British Columbia
Something smells unconstitutional. Not.
Reduce those tariffs you silly hosers.
Why, you afraid they might have authority that your representatives gave them? lol.
Isn't NAFTA an "agreement," rather than a treaty, which would have had to be ratified by the senate? I was under the impression that was the case.
If that is the case, then such an "agreement" isn't valid under the Constitution anyway, since there's no such thing mentioned in the Constitution. And it certainly can't superceed any US laws.
Mark
NAFTA was passed by a majority in the House and Senate.
And it certainly can't superceed any US laws.
You are correct, NAFTA does not have greater authority than the US Constitution. Neither does any treaty.
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.