Nancy L. Johnson: “while one could say that the administration did not respond promptly enough nor aggressively enough, the administration…”

“while one could say that the administration did not respond promptly enough nor aggressively enough, the administration has taken some tough actions with some impressive results, as my colleague, the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Crane) clearly outlined. It is also true that the industry could have been more aggressive. They could have brought a 201 safeguard action. They are spending a million dollars a month on legal fees and they could have done more to help themselves. But this, my colleagues, what we consider here today, is truly madness. I fought hard for voluntary restraint agreements for machine tools. I have worked hard on anti-dumping law. I was there when we passed the 301 capability. But this is madness. We pass this and the very next day a steel company in my district closes. Two hundred sixty high-paying UAW jobs will be gone in spite of the fact that this company invested $50 million in the recent past to modernize their equipment because they are dependent on a single source of raw carbon and alloy steel in Europe. They had even given money to American steel companies to try to get the same quality steel produced in America. They have not succeeded. They have one source. It is foreign. This bill makes no allowance for the importation of steel for which there is no source in America. How am I to explain to those employees that they are losing their jobs because they need steel from abroad that is not made in America?”