Home

Under the law it is the responsibility of this Commission to
recommend remedies to the President which are designed to relieve the injury you have determined has been caused by increased imports.

The broad categories of steel products on which your injury
determinations are based in many cases include specific items that are not, for one reason or another, causing injury.

I think the Commission appreciates that there are going to
be problematic situations where broad import restrictions are involved, and your recommendations to the President should reflect that fact.

I understand that and Congressman Deal has already appeared to express his concerns regarding the impact of any remedy on CAB, a steel flange producer and importer with operations in Georgia and Texas. I can only echo those sentiments. CAB's owners are constituents of mine and I have listened to their story with equal concern.

Therefore, I urge the Commission to build into its remedy
recommendations structures and procedures for evaluating and dealing with situations in which imports are a matter of survival for U.S. companies, and in which losing access to imports would be unfair, if not devastating. I believe CAB is here today to answer your questions on these counts.

Otherwise, as I am sure others have testified, the Commission's actions will result in injury to other American consumers, companies and industries. I don't think that Section 201 was written with the intent of playing this kind of "zero sum game" with U.S. companies and workers.

I appreciate your attention to this crucial question and stand ready to assist the Commission in its fact finding on the remedy question.