<DOC>
[109 House Committee Prints]
[From the U.S. Government Printing Office via GPO Access]
[DOCID: f:23732.wais]


109th Congress 
 1st Session                COMMITTEE PRINT                       WMCP:
                                                                  109-7
_______________________________________________________________________
                                     
 
                         SUBCOMMITTEE ON TRADE

                                 of the

                      COMMITTEE ON WAYS AND MEANS

                     U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                               __________

                            WRITTEN COMMENTS

                                   on

    TECHNICAL CORRECTIONS TO U.S. TRADE LAWS AND MISCELLANEOUS DUTY 

                            SUSPENSION BILLS





                                     
[GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]


                                     
                           SEPTEMBER 2, 2005





         Printed for the use of the Committee on Ways and Means


                                 _____

                 U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE

23-732                 WASHINGTON : 2006
_________________________________________________________________
For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government 
Printing  Office Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov  Phone: toll free 
(866) 512-1800; DC area (202) 512-1800 Fax: (202) 512-2250 Mail:
Stop SSOP, Washington, DC 20402-0001








                      COMMITTEE ON WAYS AND MEANS

                   BILL THOMAS, California, Chairman

E. CLAY SHAW, JR., Florida           CHARLES B. RANGEL, New York
NANCY L. JOHNSON, Connecticut        FORTNEY PETE STARK, California
WALLY HERGER, California             SANDER M. LEVIN, Michigan
JIM MCCRERY, Louisiana               BENJAMIN L. CARDIN, Maryland
DAVE CAMP, Michigan                  JIM MCDERMOTT, Washington
JIM RAMSTAD, Minnesota               JOHN LEWIS, Georgia
JIM NUSSLE, Iowa                     RICHARD E. NEAL, Massachusetts
SAM JOHNSON, Texas                   MICHAEL R. MCNULTY, New York
PHIL ENGLISH, Pennsylvania           WILLIAM J. JEFFERSON, Louisiana
J.D. HAYWORTH, Arizona               JOHN S. TANNER, Tennessee
JERRY WELLER, Illinois               XAVIER BECERRA, California
KENNY C. HULSHOF, Missouri           LLOYD DOGGETT, Texas
RON LEWIS, Kentucky                  EARL POMEROY, North Dakota
MARK FOLEY, Florida                  STEPHANIE TUBBS JONES, Ohio
KEVIN BRADY, Texas                   MIKE THOMPSON, California
THOMAS M. REYNOLDS, New York         JOHN B. LARSON, Connecticut
PAUL RYAN, Wisconsin                 RAHM EMANUEL, Illinois
ERIC CANTOR, Virginia
JOHN LINDER, Georgia
BOB BEAUPREZ, Colorado
MELISSA A. HART, Pennsylvania
CHRIS CHOCOLA, Indiana
DEVIN NUNES, California

                    Allison H. Giles, Chief of Staff
                  Janice Mays, Minority Chief Counsel

                                 ______

                         SUBCOMMITTEE ON TRADE

                  E. CLAY SHAW, JR., Florida, Chairman

WALLY HERGER, California             BENJAMIN L. CARDIN, Maryland
PHIL ENGLISH, Pennsylvania           SANDER M. LEVIN, Michigan
JIM NUSSLE, Iowa                     WILLIAM J. JEFFERSON, Louisiana
JERRY WELLER, Illinois               JOHN S. TANNER, Tennessee
RON LEWIS, Kentucky                  JOHN B. LARSON, Connecticut
MARK FOLEY, Florida                  JIM MCDERMOTT, Washington
KEVIN BRADY, Texas
THOMAS M. REYNOLDS, New York

Pursuant to clause 2(e)(4) of Rule XI of the Rules of the House, public 
hearing records of the Committee on Ways and Means are also published 
in electronic form. The printed hearing record remains the official 
version. Because electronic submissions are used to prepare both 
printed and electronic versions of the hearing record, the process of 
converting between various electronic formats may introduce 
unintentional errors or omissions. Such occurrences are inherent in the 
current publication process and should diminish as the process is 
further refined.






















                            C O N T E N T S

                               __________
                                                                   Page

Advisory of Tuesday, July 25, 2005, announcing request for 
  written comments on Technical Corrections to U.S. Trade Laws 
  and Miscellaneous Duty Suspension Bills........................     1
Revised Advisory of Friday, August 5, 2005, announcing additional 
  bills on Technical Corrections to U.S. Trade Laws and 
  Miscellaneous Duty Suspension Bills............................    19

                                 ------                                

H.R. 53: No comments submitted.
H.R. 178:
Buckman Laboratories, Inc., Memphis, TN, Charles D. Brandenburg 
  and William C. Pitcher, letter.................................    21
H.R. 445:
National Retail Federation, Erik O. Autor, statement.............    22
H.R. 521:
Dairy Australia, Victoria, Australia, Robert Pettit, letter......    22
Fonterra (USA), Inc., Lemoyne, PA, Edward J. Farrell, letter.....    26
General Mills, Jeffrey A. Shapiro, letter........................    29
Grocery Manufacturers Association, Mary Sophos, letter...........    30
Kerry Americas, Beloit, Wisconsin, Stan McCarthy, letter.........    32
National Milk Producers Federation, Arlington, Virginia, Jaime 
  Castaneda, statement...........................................    33
New Zealand, Government of, His Excellency John Wood, Ambassador, 
  letter.........................................................    39
Novartis Nutrition Corporation, Washington, DC, Tracy Haller, 
  letter.........................................................    39
RetireSafe, Oakton, Virginia, Charles G. Hardin, letter..........    41
U.S. Coalition for Nutritional Ingredients, letter...............    41
H.R. 617: No comments submitted.
H.R. 636: No comments submitted.
H.R. 637: No comments submitted.
H.R. 638: No comments submitted.
H.R. 639: No comments submitted.
H.R. 640: No comments submitted.
H.R. 641: No comments submitted.
H.R. 642: No comments submitted.
H.R. 643: No comments submitted.
H.R. 644: No comments submitted.
H.R. 645: No comments submitted.
H.R. 646: No comments submitted.
H.R. 647: No comments submitted.
H.R. 648: No comments submitted.
H.R. 707: No comments submitted.
H.R. 915:
Aimaq, Muzhdah, Davis, California, letter........................    44
American Numismatic Association, Colorado Springs, CO, 
  Christopher Cipoletti, letter..................................    45
American Numismatic Society, John W. Adams, Boston, MA, Kenneth 
  L. Edlow, New York, NY, Peter P. Gaspar, St. Louis, MO, Robert 
  A. Kandel, New Rochelle, NY, Clifford L. Mishler, Iola, WI, 
  Emilio M. Ortiz, San Juan, PR, Douglass F. Rohrman, Kenilworth, 
  IL, Stanley DeForest Scott, New York, NY, David B. Simpson, 
  Tenafly, NJ, Peter K. Tompa, Washington, DC, Arnold-Peter C. 
  Weiss, MD, Barrington, RI, John Whitney Walter, Plandome, NY, 
  joint letter...................................................    46
American Schools of Oriental Research, Boston, MA, Douglas R. 
  Clark, Ph.D., letter...........................................    47
Ancient Coin Collectors Guild, Gainesville, MO, Wayne G. Sayles, 
  letter and attachment..........................................    48
H.R. 915--Continued
Archaeological Institute of America, Boston, MA, Jane C. 
  Waldbaum, letter...............................................    55
Archaeological Institute of America, Bryn Mawr, PA, James C. 
  Wright, letter.................................................    56
Archaeological Institute of America, Long Island Society 
  Melville, NY, Naomi and Jesse Taub, letter.....................    57
Archaeological Institute of America, Milwaukee Society Milwaukee, 
  WI, Katherine Murrell, letter..................................    57
Archaeological Legacy Institute, Eugene, OR, Richard M. 
  Pettigrew, letter..............................................    58
Association of Dedicated Byzantine Collectors, Framingham, MA, 
  Prudence Morgan Fitts, letter..................................    59
Bard Graduate Center for Studies in the Decorative Arts, New 
  York, NY, Elizabeth Simpson, letter............................    59
Braly, Bobby R., University of Tennessee, Frank H. McClung 
  Museum, Knoxville, TN, letter..................................    60
Britt, Kelly M., Columbia University, Lancaster, PA, letter......    60
Classical Numismatic Group, Inc., Lancaster, PA, Eric James 
  Mcfadden, letter...............................................    61
Creamer, Winifred Wheaton, IL, letter............................    63
Dancsecs, Mark Stephen and Soraya Delawari, Pasadena, CA, joint 
  letter.........................................................    63
Delawari, Qudrat and Yasmine, San Diego, CA, joint letter........    64
DiMarzio, Paul, Bethel, CT, letter...............................    64
Eagle, Tara, Oxford, OH, letter..................................    65
Eckert, Suzanne L., Texas A&M University, College Station, TX, 
  letter.........................................................    66
Engineering and Science Students for the Reconstruction of 
  Afghanistan, Fremont, CA, Masood Sattari, letter...............    66
European Association of Archaeologists, Exeter, United Kingdom, 
  Anthony Harding, letter........................................    67
Fischer, John E., Wabash College, Louisville, KY, letter.........    68
Foley, Kevin P., Waltham, MA, letter.............................    68
Ford, Anabel, University of California, Santa Barbara, CA, letter    69
Gardner, Gregg, New York, letter.................................    70
German Archaeological Institute, Cairo, Egypt, Daniel Polz, 
  letter.........................................................    70
Ghous, Mostafa, Castro Valley, CA, letter........................    71
HRA, Inc., Conservation Archaeology, Henderson, NV, Suzanne B. 
  Eskenazi, letter...............................................    72
Industry Council for Tangible Assets, Severna Park, MD, Eloise A. 
  Ullman, letter.................................................    73
Ingleston, Kevin W., Frankfort, MI, letter.......................    73
International Association of Professional Numismatists, 
  Professional Numismatists Guild, and the Ancient Coin 
  Collectors Guild, Peter K. Tompa, joint statement..............    74
Jauch, Christine Irene, Oxford, OH, letter.......................    79
Johnson, Lucille Lewis, Vassar College, Poughkeepsie, NY, letter.    79
Johnson, Matthew, Encino, CA, letter.............................    80
Kuns, Erin, Indiana University, Bloomington, IN, letter..........    80
Lawyers' Committee for Cultural Heritage Preservation Chicago, 
  IL, Patty Gerstenblith, letter.................................    81
Leigh, Shawna, The College of William and Mary Williamsburg, VA, 
  letter.........................................................    83
Lundn, Staffan, Gteborg, Sweden, letter..........................    83
Marshall, Sydne B., Westfield, NJ, letter........................    84
Peres, Tanya M., Murfreesboro, Tennessee, letter.................    85
Pick, Robert O., Las Cruces, NM, letter..........................    85
Rasmussen, Josephine Munch, Oslo, Norway, letter.................    86
Ray, Paul, Berrien Springs, Michigan, letter.....................    86
Redman, Angela, Seattle, WA, letter..............................    87
Saving Antiquities for Everyone, Jersey City, NJ, Cindy Ho, 
  letter.........................................................    88
Society for American Archaeology, Kenneth M. Ames, letter........    88
The Field Museum, Chicago, IL, Deborah Bekken, letter............    89
The World Archaeological Congress, Adelaide, Australia, Dr Claire 
  Smith, Dr Larry J. Zimmerman, letter...........................    90
Underhill, Anne P., Chicago, Illinois, letter....................    91
Unidroit-L, Goleta, CA, David E. Welsh, letter...................    92
University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC, 
  Jodi Magness, letter...........................................    97
H.R. 1068:
American Iron & Steel Institute, Cold Finished Steel Bar 
  Institute, Committee on Pipe & Tube Imports, Metals Service 
  Center Institute, Specialty Steel Industry of North America, 
  Steel Manufacturers Association, United Steelworkers, and Wire 
  Rod Producers' Coalition, joint statement......................    98
American Wire Producers Association, Alexandria, VA, Robert 
  Moffitt, letter................................................    98
Committee of Domestic Steel Wire Rope and Specialty Cable 
  Manufacturers, Jeffrey S. Levin, letter........................   100
Independent Steelworkers Union, Weirton, WV, Mark Glyptis, letter   101
Trinity Industries, Inc., Dallas, TX, letter.....................   103
H.R. 1115:
Neville Peterson, LLP, New York, NY, John M. Peterson, letter....   105
H.R. 1121:
A.C. Houston Lumber Company, North Las Vegas, NV, Michael M. 
  Murray, letter.................................................   108
Accent Furniture, Maryland Heights, MO, Dennis Boyd, letter......   109
AK Steel Corporation, Middletown, OH, James L. Wainscott, letter.   110
Alcoa, Russell C. Wisor, letter..................................   111
Allegheny Technologies Incorporated, Pittsburgh, PA, Jon D. 
  Walton, statement..............................................   112
Alperts, Inc., Seekonk, MA, Hershel L. Alpert, letter............   113
American Apparel and Footwear Association, Arlington, VA, Stephen 
  E. Lamar, letter...............................................   114
American Chamber of Commerce in Germany e.V., Berlin, Germany, 
  Dierk Mueller, letter..........................................   115
American Iron and Steel Institute, statement.....................   118
American Manufacturing Trade Action Coalition, Auggie Tantillo, 
  letter.........................................................   119
American Wholesale Furniture, Inc, Indianapolis, IN, Jim Mahin, 
  letter.........................................................   120
Ampac Packaging, LLC, Cincinnati, OH, John Q. Baumann, letter....   121
Ash Grove Cement Company, Overland Park, KS, Charles T. 
  Sunderland, letter.............................................   122
Association of Food Industries, Inc., Neptune, NJ, Jeffrey S. 
  Levin, letter..................................................   123
Association of International Automobile Manufacturers, Arlington, 
  VA, Timothy MacCarthy, letter..................................   124
Backyard Ventures, Amarillo, TX, Michael Thomas DeArmon, 
  statement......................................................   125
Ball and Roller Bearing Manufacturers Association, Birmingham, 
  United Kingdom, Kathryn Joy Hartigan, letter...................   126
Bartlett, Josiah H., Moultonboro, NH, statement..................   129
Best Buy Co., Inc., Richfield, MN, Paula J. Prahl, letter........   130
British Embassy, David Manning, letter...........................   131
Bundesverband der Deutschen Industrie, Berlin, Germany, Beatrice 
  Khne and Sigrid Zirbel, statement..............................   132
Buzzi Unicem USA Inc., Bethlehem, PA, David A. Nepereny, Michael 
  Berlin, William Humenuk, Bruce Keim, joint letter..............   132
Cal-Asia Truss, Concord, CA, Allen Erickson, statement...........   133
Calfiornia Minnesota Honey Farms, Eagle Bend, MN, Jeff Anderson..   134
California Cut Flower Commission, Watsonville, CA, Lee Murphy, 
  letter.........................................................   135
California Portland Cement Company, Glendora, CA, James A. 
  Repman, letter.................................................   137
Canadian Embassy, Frank McKenna, letter..........................   138
Carpenter Technology Corporation, Reading, PA, William A. 
  Wellock, letter................................................   138
Cattle Producers of Washington, Soap Lake, WA, Chad Henneman, 
  letter.........................................................   139
Censea Inc., Northfield, IL, Jeffrey A. Stern, letter............   141
Century Furniture, Hickory, NC, Robert J. Maricich, joint letter.   142
Chambers Truss Inc, Fort Pierce, FL, Robert John Becht, statement   143
City Furniture, Tamarac, FL, Keith Koenig, letter................   144
Coalition for Fair Lumber Imports, Barry Cullen, statement.......   145
Committee to Support U.S. Trade Laws, David A. Hartquist, letter.   146
Confederation of British Industry, London, United Kingdom, Gary 
  J. Campkin, letter.............................................   147
Confederation of the Food and Drink Industries of the EU, 
  Brussels, Belgium, Daniela Israelachwili, letter...............   148
Consumers for World Trade, Maureen Smith, letter.................   148
Consuming Industries Trade Action Coalition, Michael I. Fanning, 
  letter.........................................................   150
Contessa Premium Foods, Inc., San Pedro, CA, Gregory J. Morrow, 
  letter.........................................................   152
Copeland Furniture, Bradford, VT, Timothy E. Copeland, letter....   153
Copper and Brass Fabricators Council, Joseph Mayer, letter.......   153
H.R. 1121--Continued
Council Tool, Lake Waccamaw, NC, John M. Council, letter.........   154
Crawfish Processors Alliance, Breaux Bridge, LA, Adam J. Johnson, 
  letter.........................................................   156
DAK Americas LLC, Charlotte, NC, Richard A. Lane Jr., letter.....   158
Eagle Materials Inc., Dallas, TX, Steven R. Rowley, letter.......   159
Embassy of Chile, Andres Bianchi, letter.........................   160
Embassy of India, Ronen Sen, letter..............................   161
Empress International, Ltd., Port Washington, NY, Timothy 
  McLellan, letter...............................................   161
European Chemical Industry Council, Brussels, Belgium, Rene Van 
  Sloten, letter.................................................   162
European Commission Delegation, Angelos Pangratis, letter........   163
European Confederation of Iron and Steel Industries, statement 
  and attachment.................................................   165
European Steel Tube Association, Marc Bodineau, letter...........   167
Federation of European Bearing Manufacturers' Associations, 
  Frankfurt, Germany, Andreas Rowold, letter.....................   168
Floral Trade Council, Ovid, MI, William R. Carlson, letter.......   169
Florida Forest Products, Largo, FL, Richard Cashman, statement...   170
Food and Drink Federation, Melanie Leech, London, England, letter   172
French Federation of ores, industrial minerals and non ferrous 
  metals, Paris, France, Patricia Vasseur, letter................   172
Gates Corporation, Denver, CO, A.L. Stecklein, letter............   173
Gebr. Reinfurt GmbH & Co. Kg, Wuerzburg, Germany, Sabine 
  Reinfurt-Jaeger, letter........................................   173
General Mills UK, J.G. Moseley, Middlesex, England, letter.......   175
Gerdau Ameristeel, Inc., Tampa, FL, Phillip E. Casey, letter.....   175
Government of Japan, statement...................................   176
Grocery Manufacturers Association, Mary Sophos, letter...........   178
Hanson Aggregates, San Diego, CA, Mark T. Long, letter...........   179
Hart's Manufacturing Committee, Collierville, TN, Thomas W. Hart, 
  letter.........................................................   180
Higdon Furniture Co., Quincy, FL, Warren Higdon III, letter......   180
Hilex Poly Co., LLC, Hartsville, SC, David C. Booher, letter.....   181
Home Decorators Collection, Inc., Hazelwood, MO, Thomas K. 
  Wilcher, letter................................................   182
Honeyland, Inc., Wolf Point, MT, Harry Rodenberg, statement......   183
Idaho Truss & Component Co., Meridian, ID, Kendall R. Hoyd, 
  letter.........................................................   183
Independent Steelworkers Union, Weirton, WV, Mark Glyptis, letter   184
International Dynasty Corporation, Houston, TX, Sophie Chen, 
  letter.........................................................   186
International Foodservice Distributors Association, Falls Church, 
  VA, David French, letter.......................................   187
Japan Machinery Center for Trade and Investment, Tokyo, Japan, 
  Osamu Morimoto, letter and attachment..........................   187
Kansas Cattlemen's Association, Manhattan, KS, Doran Junk, letter   193
Keystone Consolidated Industries, Inc., Peoria, IL, David L. 
  Cheek, letter..................................................   195
Kincaid Furniture Company, Inc., Hudson, NC, Steven M. Kincaid, 
  letter.........................................................   195
Koyo Corporation of USA, Westlake, OH, Thomas Peacock, letter....   196
L'Union des Industries de la Communaute Europenne, Brussels, 
  Belgium, Philippe De Buck, statement and attachment............   198
Lafarge North America, Herndon, VA, Sherry E. Peske, letter......   199
Lehigh Cement Company, Allentown, PA, Jeffry Brozyna, letter.....   200
Libbey Inc., Toledo, OH, Susan Allene Kovach, letter.............   201
Littfin Lumber Company, Bob Mochinski, Winsted, Minnesota, letter   202
Los Angeles Cold Storage Company, Los Angeles, CA, Larry Rauch, 
  letter.........................................................   203
Lumi-Lite Candle Co., Inc., Norwich, OH, George Pappas Sr., 
  letter.........................................................   204
Marine Management Insurance Brokers, Inc., Park City, UT, Curtis 
  W. Keyes, letter...............................................   205
Maui Land & Pineapple Company, Inc., Kahului, HI, Warren A. 
  Suzuki, letter.................................................   206
Members of the Minnesota Legislature Representing Minnesota's 
  ``Iron Range,'' Saint Paul, MN, Tom Bakk, Tom Saxhaug, David 
  Tomassoni, Irv Anderson, David Dill, Tom Rukavina, Tony 
  Sertich, and Loren Solberg, joint statement....................   207
Mexinox USA, Inc., Bannockburn, IL, Adolfo Acevedo, letter.......   208
Michelin North America, Greenville, SC, Martin Wardle, letter....   208
Michels and Company, Lynwood, CA, Irwin Allen, letter............   209
Micron Technology, Inc., Boise, ID, Roderic W. Lewis, letter.....   209
MJ Wood Products, Inc., Morrisville, VT, Geoffrey Jackson, letter   211
Mobel, Inc., Ferdinand, IN, Paul A. Ruhe, letter.................   212
H.R. 1121--Continued
Montana Cattlemen's Association, Billings, MT, Brett DeBruycker, 
  letter.........................................................   213
Moosehead Manufacturing Company, Monson, ME, John E. Wentworth, 
  letter.........................................................   215
Mountain Avenue Bees, Inc., Hesperia, CA, Ron Spears, letter.....   216
National Cement Company of California, Encino, CA, Donald J. 
  Unmacht Jr., letter............................................   216
National Confectioners Association and Chocolate Manufactures 
  Association, Vienna, Virginia, Lawrence T. Graham and Lynn 
  Bragg, joint statement.........................................   217
National Fisheries Institute, McLean, VA, John Connelly, letter..   220
National Retail Federation, statement............................   221
Neenah Foundry Company, Neenah, WI, Timothy J. Koller, letter....   226
North American Stainless, Ghent, KY, Mary Jean Riley, letter.....   226
NSK Corporation, Ann Arbor, MI, Tom Rouse, letter................   227
Oregon Truss Co., Inc., Salem, OR, David W. Hughes, statement....   229
Pacamor Kubar Bearings, Troy, NY, Augustine J. Sperrazza Jr., 
  letter.........................................................   230
Plum Building Systems Inc., Osceola, IA, Richard Parrino, letter.   232
Precision Metalforming Association, Independence, OH, William E. 
  Gaskin, letter and attachment..................................   233
Ranchers-Cattlemen Action Legal Fund, United Stockgrowers of 
  America, Billings, MT, Leo R. McDonnell, letter................   236
Raymour & Flanigan, Neil Goldberg, Liverpool, New York, letter...   237
Retail Industry Leaders Association, Arlington, VA, Sandra L. 
  Kennedy, letter................................................   238
Rich Products Corporation, Buffalo, NY, Robert E. Rich Jr., 
  letter.........................................................   240
Rich-seapak Corporation, Saint Simons Island, GA, Jack C. 
  Kilgore, letter................................................   241
Rinker Materials, West Palm Beach, FL, Eddie Allsopp, Karl 
  Watson, letter.................................................   242
Sandberg Furniture Manufacturing Company, Inc., Los Angeles, CA, 
  John A. Sandberg, Phillip Sweet, and Michael Bagwell, joint 
  letter.........................................................   243
Schaeffler Group USA, Inc., New York, NY, Max F. Schutzman, 
  letter.........................................................   244
Seaman Paper Company of Massachusetts, Inc., Baldwinville, MA, 
  George Davenport Jones III.....................................   248
Shelter Systems Limited, Westminster, MD, Joseph Dwight Hikel, 
  statement......................................................   248
Sioux Honey Association, Sioux City, IA, David Barclay Allibone, 
  letter.........................................................   250
Southern Shrimp Alliance, Tarpon Springs, FL, Deborah Long, 
  statement......................................................   250
Specialty Steel Industry of North America, Jack W. Shilling, 
  statement......................................................   251
Stewart and Stewart, Terence P. Stewart, letter..................   253
Stock Building Supply, Dayton, OH, Christopher Paulhus, statement   256
Sunny Dell Foods, Inc., Kennett Square, PA, Gary F. Caligiuri, 
  letter.........................................................   258
Superbag Corporation, Houston, TX, Isaac Bazbaz, letter..........   259
Tampa Maid Foods, Inc., Lakeland, FL, Edward B. Smith, letter....   259
Texas Industries, Dallas, TX, Mel G. Brekhus, letter.............   260
The Bombay Company, Inc., Fort Worth, TX, Michael J. 
  Veitenheimer, letter...........................................   261
The Food Products Association, Scott Riehl, statement............   262
The Garlic Company, Bakersfield, CA, Joe Lane and John Layous, 
  letter.........................................................   264
The Home Depot, Kent Knutson, letter.............................   266
The NTN Companies, Mt. Prospect, IL, Kazumune V. Kano, letter....   266
Titan America, Coral Springs, FL, Deerfield Beach, FL, Orlando 
  Vazquez, Timothy Kuebler, and Robert A. Sells, joint letter....   268
Titan America, LLC, Norfolk, VA, Russell A. Fink, letter.........   269
Trade Masters, LLC, Peachtree City, GA, Ron O'Dell, letter.......   270
U.S. Dairy Export Council, Arlington, VA, Thomas M. Suber, 
  statement......................................................   271
U.S. Foundry & Manufacturing Corp., Hialeah, FL, Alex L. 
  DeBogory, letter...............................................   271
Union de Empresas Siderurgicas, Madrid, Spain, Juan Ignacio 
  Bartolome, letter..............................................   272
Union of Italian Pasta Manufacturers, Rome, Italy, Mario Rummo, 
  letter.........................................................   273
Union of Organizations of Manufacturers of Pasta Products of the 
  E.U., Rome, Italy, Mario Rummo, letter.........................   274
United States Steel Corporation, Terrence D. Straub, letter......   275
United Steelworkers, William J. Klinefelter, Pittsburgh, PA, 
  letter.........................................................   275
Up Country, Inc., Cumming, GA, Leslie W. Thompson, letter........   276
U.S. Magnesium LLC, Salt Lake City, UT, Lee R. Brown, letter.....   278
Vanguard Plastics, Farmers Branch, TX, William C. Seanor, joint 
  letter.........................................................   279
Vaughan Furniture Company, Inc., Galax, VA, William B. Vaughan, 
  letter.........................................................   280
Vaughan-Bassett Furniture Corporation, Galax, VA, John D. Bassett 
  IV, letter.....................................................   281
Vessey and Company, Inc., El Centro, CA, Mark Allegranza, 
  statement......................................................   282
H.R. 1121--Continued
WCI Steel, Inc., Warren, OH, Patrick G. Tatom, letter............   283
Webb Furniture Enterprises, Inc., Galax, VA, Lee H. Houston, 
  Robert Kirby, John Mcghee, and Barry Branscome, joint letter...
Webb Furniture Enterprises, Inc., John Mcghee, Galax, VA, joint 
  letter.........................................................   284
Wellman, Inc., Fort Mill, SC, Thomas M. Duff, letter.............   285
Wieland Metals, Inc., Wheeling, IL, Markus Schuler, letter.......   286
Will & Baumer, Inc., Syracuse, NY, Marshall John Ciccone, letter.   287
WirtschaftsVereinigung Metalle, Hans-Reiner Haeussler, and 
  Wilfried Held, joint letter....................................   287
Wood Truss Council of America, Madison, WI, Kendall Hoyd and Sean 
  Shields, letter................................................   288
H.R. 1202:
Johnson Controls, Inc., Plymouth, MI, William J. Kohler, letter..   290
H.R. 1221:
American Apparel and Footwear Association, Arlington, VA, Stephen 
  E. Lamar, letter...............................................   290
Footwear Distributors and Retailers of America, Peter T. 
  Mangione, letter...............................................   292
Payless ShoeSource, Topeka, KS, Michael J. Massey, letter........   293
Retail Industry Leaders Association, Arlington, VA, Sandra L. 
  Kennedy, letter................................................   295
Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., Angela Hofmann, letter....................   297
H.R. 1230:
American Apparel and Footwear Association, Arlington, VA, Stephen 
  E. Lamar, letter...............................................   298
Kellwood Company, Chesterfield, MO, Wendy Wieland, letter........   300
H.R. 1274:
Solvay Chemicals, Inc., Houston, TX, Richard L. Hogan, letter....   300
H.R. 1336:
Cymer,Inc., San Diego, CA, Albert P. Cefalo, letter..............   301
Semi, Maggie Hershey, Washington, DC, letter.....................   202

H.R. 1391: No comments submitted.

H.R. 1392: No comments submitted.

H.R. 1407:
Wire Rod Producers Coalition, Paul C. Rosenthal, statement.......   302

H.R. 1444: No comments submitted.

H.R. 1464: No comments submitted.

H.R. 1465: No comments submitted.

H.R. 1466: No comments submitted.

H.R. 1534:
Association of Georgia's Textile, Carpet and Consumer Products 
  Manufacturers, George Leroy Bowen III, letter..................   304
Coats & Clark, Albany, GA, Audie McDearis, letter................   305
Culp Inc., Burlington, NC, Jerald Stephen Owens, joint letter....   305
Kaltex Fibers and Cydsa, Thomas J. Scanlon, Washington, DC, 
  letter.........................................................   306
National Council of Textile Organizations, Missy J. Branson, 
  letter.........................................................   307
National Spinning Co., Inc., Washington, NC, James Chesnutt, 
  letter.........................................................   307
Patrick, Gilbert Hambright, Patrick Yarns, Kings Mountain, NC, 
  letter.........................................................   308
Quaker Fabric Corporation of Fall River, Fall River, MA, Larry A. 
  Liebenow, letter...............................................   309
Sterling Fibers, Pace, FL, Paul Saunders, statement..............   309
H.R. 1535:
Association of Georgia's Textile, Carpet and Consumer Products 
  Manufacturers, George Leroy Bowen III, letter..................   310
Coats & Clark, Albany, GA, Audie McDearis, letter................   310
Culp Inc., Burlington, NC, Jerald Stephen Owens, joint letter....   311
Kaltex Fibers and Cydsa, Thomas J. Scanlon, Washington, DC, 
  letter.........................................................   311
National Council of Textile Organizations, Missy J. Branson, 
  letter.........................................................   312
National Spinning Co., Inc., Washington, NC, James Chesnutt, 
  letter.........................................................   313
Patrick, Gilbert Hambright, Patrick Yarns, Kings Mountain, NC, 
  letter.........................................................   314
Quaker Fabric Corporation of Fall River, Fall River, MA, Larry A. 
  Liebenow, letter...............................................   314
Sterling Fibers, Pace, FL, Paul Saunders, statement..............   315
H.R. 1536:
Association of Georgia's Textile, Carpet and Consumer Products 
  Manufacturers, George Leroy Bowen III, letter..................   315
Coats & Clark, Albany, GA, Audie McDearis, letter................   316
H.R. 1536--Continued
Culp Inc., Burlington, NC, Jerald Stephen Owens, joint letter....   316
Kaltex Fibers and Cydsa, Thomas J. Scanlon, Washington, DC, 
  letter.........................................................   317
H.R. 1536--Continued
National Council of Textile Organizations, Missy J. Branson, 
  letter.........................................................   318
National Spinning Co., Inc., Washington, NC, James Chesnutt, 
  letter.........................................................   318
Patrick, Gilbert Hambright, Patrick Yarns, Kings Mountain, NC, 
  letter.........................................................   319
Quaker Fabric Corporation of Fall River, Fall River, MA, Larry A. 
  Liebenow, letter...............................................   320
Sterling Fibers, Pace, FL, Paul Saunders, statement..............   320

H.R. 1537: No comments submitted.

H.R. 1609: No comments submitted.

H.R. 1610: No comments submitted.

H.R. 1698: No comments submitted.

H.R. 1699: No comments submitted.

H.R. 1700: No comments submitted.

H.R. 1701: No comments submitted.

H.R. 1702: No comments submitted.

H.R. 1715:
LANXESS Corporation, Pittsburgh, PA, Jamie B. Schaeffer, letter..   321
PPG Industries, Inc., Monroeville, PA, Michael H. McGarry, letter   321

H.R. 1724: No comments submitted.

H.R. 1725: No comments submitted.

H.R. 1726: No comments submitted.

H.R. 1727: No comments submitted.

H.R. 1732:
Sony Electronics Inc., Park Ridge, NJ, David Newman, letter and 
  attachment.....................................................   322
H.R. 1733:
Sony Electronics Inc., Park Ridge, NJ, David Newman, letter and 
  attachment.....................................................   324
H.R. 1734:
Sony Electronics Inc., Park Ridge, NJ, David Newman, letter and 
  attachment.....................................................   325

H.R. 1752: No comments submitted.

H.R. 1775: No comments submitted.

H.R. 1777: No comments submitted.

H.R. 1778: No comments submitted.

H.R. 1779: No comments submitted.

H.R. 1780: No comments submitted.

H.R. 1781: No comments submitted.

H.R. 1782:
Chemtura Chemical, Waterbury, CT, Llyod N. Moon, joint letter....   327

H.R. 1783: No comments submitted.

H.R. 1784: No comments submitted.

H.R. 1785: No comments submitted.

H.R. 1786: No comments submitted.

H.R. 1787: No comments submitted.

H.R. 1788: No comments submitted.

H.R. 1799: No comments submitted.

H.R. 1802:
Montana Cattleman's Association, Billings, MT, Brett DeBruycker, 
  letter.........................................................   328
Ranchers-Cattlemen Action Legal Fund, United Stockgrowers of 
  America, Billings, MT, Leo R. McDonnell, letter................   330

H.R. 1813: No comments submitted.

H.R. 1824: No comments submitted.

H.R. 1826: No comments submitted.

H.R. 1827: No comments submitted.

H.R. 1828: No comments submitted.

H.R. 1829: No comments submitted.

H.R. 1830: No comments submitted.

H.R. 1831: No comments submitted.

H.R. 1832: No comments submitted.

H.R. 1833: No comments submitted.

H.R. 1838: No comments submitted.

H.R. 1839: No comments submitted.

H.R. 1840: No comments submitted.

H.R. 1841: No comments submitted.

H.R. 1842: No comments submitted.

H.R. 1843: No comments submitted.

H.R. 1844: No comments submitted.

H.R. 1845: No comments submitted.

H.R. 1846: No comments submitted.

H.R. 1848: No comments submitted.

H.R. 1851: No comments submitted.

H.R. 1854: No comments submitted.

H.R. 1855: No comments submitted.

H.R. 1856: No comments submitted.

H.R. 1857: No comments submitted.

H.R. 1858: No comments submitted.

H.R. 1877:
Continental AG, Auburn Hills, MI, Philip M. Headley, letter......   330

H.R. 1878: No comments submitted.

H.R. 1880: No comments submitted.

H.R. 1881: No comments submitted.

H.R. 1882: No comments submitted.

H.R. 1883: No comments submitted.

H.R. 1884: No comments submitted.

H.R. 1885: No comments submitted.

H.R. 1886: No comments submitted.

H.R. 1887: No comments submitted.

H.R. 1888: No comments submitted.

H.R. 1889: No comments submitted.

H.R. 1890: No comments submitted.

H.R. 1891: No comments submitted.

H.R. 1892: No comments submitted.

H.R. 1893: No comments submitted.

H.R. 1894: No comments submitted.

H.R. 1895: No comments submitted.

H.R. 1896: No comments submitted.

H.R. 1897: No comments submitted.

H.R. 1899: No comments submitted.

H.R. 1900: No comments submitted.

H.R. 1901: No comments submitted.

H.R. 1903: No comments submitted.

H.R. 1904: No comments submitted.

H.R. 1906: No comments submitted.

H.R. 1907: No comments submitted.

H.R. 1908: No comments submitted.

H.R. 1909: No comments submitted.

H.R. 1910: No comments submitted.

H.R. 1911: No comments submitted.

H.R. 1913: No comments submitted.

H.R. 1914:
Cherry Marketing Institute, Dewitt, MI, Philip J. Korson II......   331

H.R. 1915: No comments submitted.

H.R. 1916: No comments submitted.

H.R. 1917: No comments submitted.

H.R. 1918: No comments submitted.

H.R. 1919: No comments submitted.

H.R. 1920: No comments submitted.

H.R. 1921: No comments submitted.

H.R. 1922: No comments submitted.

H.R. 1923: No comments submitted.

H.R. 1924: No comments submitted.

H.R. 1925: No comments submitted.

H.R. 1926: No comments submitted.

H.R. 1927: No comments submitted.

H.R. 1928: No comments submitted.

H.R. 1934:
Tarkett, Inc., Houston, TX, Mannington Mills, Inc., Salem, NJ, 
  Armstrong World Industries, Inc., Lancaster, PA, Congoleum 
  Corp., Mercerville, NJ, Edward F. Gerwin, Jr., joint statement.   332

H.R. 1935: No comments submitted.

H.R. 1936: No comments submitted.

H.R. 1937: No comments submitted.

H.R. 1938: No comments submitted.

H.R. 1941: No comments submitted.

H.R. 1944: No comments submitted.

H.R. 1945:
American Apparel and Footwear Association, Arlington, VA, Stephen 
  E. Lamar, letter...............................................   334
Brooks Brothers, Inc., New York, NY, Joe Dixon, letter...........   335
Buhler Quality Yarns Corporation, Jefferson, GA, W. Bieri, letter   336
Gitman Brothers, New York, NY, John Minahan III, letter..........   337
National Council of Textile Organizations, Cass Johnson, letter..   338
Supima, Phoenix, AZ, Jesse W. Curlee, letter.....................   339
H.R. 1947:
HoMedics, Commerce Township, MI, Renee Chiuchiarelli, letter.....   340
H.R. 1948:
HoMedics, Commerce Township, MI, Renee Chiuchiarelli, letter.....   341
H.R. 1949:
HoMedics, Commerce Township, MI, Renee Chiuchiarelli, letter.....   342
National Candle Association, Randolph Stayin, Washington, DC, 
  letter.........................................................   343

H.R. 1959: No comments submitted.

H.R. 1962: No comments submitted.

H.R. 1963: No comments submitted.

H.R. 1964: No comments submitted.

H.R. 1965: No comments submitted.

H.R. 1966: No comments submitted.

H.R. 1967: No comments submitted.

H.R. 1968: No comments submitted.

H.R. 1969: No comments submitted.

H.R. 1970: No comments submitted.

H.R. 1971: No comments submitted.

H.R. 1976: No comments submitted.

H.R. 1978: No comments submitted.

H.R. 1979: No comments submitted.

H.R. 1990: No comments submitted.

H.R. 1991: No comments submitted.

H.R. 1992: No comments submitted.

H.R. 1997: No comments submitted.

H.R. 2003:
Cheese Importers Association of America, Inc., New York, NY, 
  Thomas G. Toto, letter.........................................   344
International Dairy Foods Association, Connie Tipton, letter.....   344
Lactalis American Group, Inc., Buffalo, NY, Erick Boutry, letter.   345
The Tipton Group, E. Linwood Tipton, letter......................   346

H.R. 2009: No comments submitted.

H.R. 2010: No comments submitted.

H.R. 2015:
Harley-Davidson Motor Company, Milwaukee, WI, Wayne T. Curtin, 
  letter.........................................................   347

H.R. 2016: No comments submitted.

H.R. 2019: No comments submitted.

H.R. 2020: No comments submitted.

H.R. 2021: No comments submitted.

H.R. 2022: No comments submitted.

H.R. 2023: No comments submitted.

H.R. 2024: No comments submitted.

H.R. 2025: No comments submitted.

H.R. 2026: No comments submitted.

H.R. 2027: No comments submitted.

H.R. 2028: No comments submitted.

H.R. 2029: No comments submitted.

H.R. 2030: No comments submitted.

H.R. 2031: No comments submitted.

H.R. 2032: No comments submitted.

H.R. 2033: No comments submitted.

H.R. 2056:
Chemtura Chemical, Waterbury, CT, Llyod N. Moon, joint letter....   348

H.R. 2077: No comments submitted.

H.R. 2078: No comments submitted.

H.R. 2079: No comments submitted.

H.R. 2080: No comments submitted.

H.R. 2081: No comments submitted.

H.R. 2082: No comments submitted.

H.R. 2083: No comments submitted.

H.R. 2084: No comments submitted.

H.R. 2085: No comments submitted.

H.R. 2086: No comments submitted.

H.R. 2091: No comments submitted.

H.R. 2093: No comments submitted.

H.R. 2094: No comments submitted.

H.R. 2095: No comments submitted.

H.R. 2096:
Beaver Manufacturing Company, Mansfield, GA, William D. Loeble, 
  letter.........................................................   349

H.R. 2114: No comments submitted.

H.R. 2115: No comments submitted.

H.R. 2116: No comments submitted.

H.R. 2117:
Clariant Corporation, Martin, SC, Andrew Zamoyski, letter........   350

H.R. 2118: No comments submitted.

H.R. 2119:
Sun Chemical Corp., Cincinnati, OH, Edwin B. Faulkner, letter....   350

H.R. 2120: No comments submitted.

H.R. 2128: No comments submitted.

H.R. 2135: No comments submitted.

H.R. 2136: No comments submitted.

H.R. 2137: No comments submitted.

H.R. 2138: No comments submitted.

H.R. 2139: No comments submitted.

H.R. 2140: No comments submitted.

H.R. 2141: No comments submitted.

H.R. 2142: No comments submitted.

H.R. 2143: No comments submitted.

H.R. 2144: No comments submitted.

H.R. 2145:
Lubrizol Corporation, Wickliffe, OH, David L. Cowen, letter......   350
H.R. 2146:
Chemtura Chemical, Waterbury, CT, Llyod N. Moon, joint letter....   350
H.R. 2147:
R.T. Vanderbilt Company, Inc., Norwalk, CT, Joseph Denaro, letter 
  and attachment.................................................   351

H.R. 2148: No comments submitted.

H.R. 2149: No comments submitted.

H.R. 2150: No comments submitted.

H.R. 2151:
Lubrizol Corporation, Wickliffe, OH, David L. Cowen, letter......   352
H.R. 2152:
R.T. Vanderbilt Company, Inc., Norwalk, CT, Joseph Denaro, letter 
  and attachment.................................................   353

H.R. 2153: No comments submitted.

H.R. 2154: No comments submitted.

H.R. 2155: No comments submitted.

H.R. 2156: No comments submitted.

H.R. 2157: No comments submitted.

H.R. 2158: No comments submitted.

H.R. 2159: No comments submitted.

H.R. 2160: No comments submitted.

H.R. 2161: No comments submitted.

H.R. 2162: No comments submitted.

H.R. 2163: No comments submitted.

H.R. 2164: No comments submitted.

H.R. 2165: No comments submitted.

H.R. 2166: No comments submitted.

H.R. 2167: No comments submitted.

H.R. 2168: No comments submitted.

H.R. 2169: No comments submitted.

H.R. 2170: No comments submitted.

H.R. 2171: No comments submitted.

H.R. 2172:
Chemtura Chemical, Waterbury, CT, Llyod N. Moon, joint letter....   354

H.R. 2173: No comments submitted.

H.R. 2175: No comments submitted.

H.R. 2179:
Mitsubishi Gas Chemical America, Inc., Simeon M. Kriesberg, joint 
  letter.........................................................   355

H.R. 2198: No comments submitted.

H.R. 2212: No comments submitted.

H.R. 2213: No comments submitted.

H.R. 2214: No comments submitted.

H.R. 2215: No comments submitted.

H.R. 2220: No comments submitted.

H.R. 2221:
Velsicol Chemical Corporation, Rosemont, IL, Elizabeth Anne 
  Karkula, letter................................................   356

H.R. 2222: No comments submitted.

H.R. 2223: No comments submitted.

H.R. 2224: No comments submitted.

H.R. 2225: No comments submitted.

H.R. 2226:
Celanese, Bob Carpenter, letter..................................   357
Lanxess Corporation, Pittsburgh, PA, Jamie B. Schaeffer, letter..   358

H.R. 2227: No comments submitted.

H.R. 2228: No comments submitted.

H.R. 2241: No comments submitted.

H.R. 2242: No comments submitted.

H.R. 2243: No comments submitted.

H.R. 2244: No comments submitted.

H.R. 2245: No comments submitted.

H.R. 2246: No comments submitted.

H.R. 2252: No comments submitted.

H.R. 2253: No comments submitted.

H.R. 2254: No comments submitted.

H.R. 2255: No comments submitted.

H.R. 2256: No comments submitted.

H.R. 2260: No comments submitted.

H.R. 2261: No comments submitted.

H.R. 2262: No comments submitted.

H.R. 2263: No comments submitted.

H.R. 2264: No comments submitted.

H.R. 2265:
Sybron Chermicals Inc., Burmingham, NJ, Ralf Matt, statement.....   358
H.R. 2266:
Purolite Company, Bala Cynwyd, PA, Don Brodie, letter............   358
Sybron Chermicals Inc., Burmingham, NJ, Ralf Matt, statement.....   359

H.R. 2267: No comments submitted.

H.R. 2268: No comments submitted.

H.R. 2269: No comments submitted.

H.R. 2270: No comments submitted.

H.R. 2271: No comments submitted.

H.R. 2272: No comments submitted.

H.R. 2273: No comments submitted.

H.R. 2274: No comments submitted.

H.R. 2275: No comments submitted.

H.R. 2276: No comments submitted.

H.R. 2277: No comments submitted.

H.R. 2278: No comments submitted.

H.R. 2279: No comments submitted.

H.R. 2280: No comments submitted.

H.R. 2281: No comments submitted.

H.R. 2282: No comments submitted.

H.R. 2285:
Mattel Inc., Thomas F. St. Maxens, statement.....................   359
Tara Toy Corporation, Hauppauge, NY, Louis S. Shoichet, statement   360
H.R. 2286:
Mattel Inc., Thomas F. St. Maxens, statement.....................   360
Tara Toy Corporation, Hauppauge, NY, Louis S. Shoichet, statement   361
H.R. 2287:
Mattel Inc., Thomas F. St. Maxens, statement.....................   361
Tara Toy Corporation, Hauppauge, NY, Louis S. Shoichet, statement   362
H.R. 2288:
Mattel Inc., Thomas F. St. Maxens, statement.....................   363
Tara Toy Corporation, Hauppauge, NY, Louis S. Shoichet, statement   363
H.R. 2289:
Mattel Inc., Thomas F. St. Maxens, statement.....................   364
Tara Toy Corporation, Hauppauge, NY, Louis S. Shoichet, statement   365

H.R. 2302: No comments submitted.

H.R. 2303: No comments submitted.

H.R. 2309: No comments submitted.

H.R. 2310: No comments submitted.

H.R. 2311: No comments submitted.

H.R. 2312: No comments submitted.

H.R. 2313: No comments submitted.

H.R. 2314: No comments submitted.

H.R. 2315: No comments submitted.

H.R. 2316: No comments submitted.

H.R. 2336: No comments submitted.

H.R. 2371: No comments submitted.

H.R. 2372: No comments submitted.

H.R. 2373: No comments submitted.

H.R. 2374: No comments submitted.

H.R. 2375: No comments submitted.

H.R. 2377: No comments submitted.

H.R. 2380:
Oscient Pharmaceuticals Corporation, Waltham, MA, Stephen Cohen, 
  letter.........................................................   365

H.R. 2381: No comments submitted.

H.R. 2382: No comments submitted.

H.R. 2394: No comments submitted.

H.R. 2395: No comments submitted.

H.R. 2396: No comments submitted.

H.R. 2397: No comments submitted.

H.R. 2402: No comments submitted.

H.R. 2403: No comments submitted.

H.R. 2404: No comments submitted.

H.R. 2405: No comments submitted.

H.R. 2406: No comments submitted.

H.R. 2424: No comments submitted.

H.R. 2430: No comments submitted.

H.R. 2431: No comments submitted.

H.R. 2432: No comments submitted.

H.R. 2433: No comments submitted.

H.R. 2434: No comments submitted.

H.R. 2435: No comments submitted.

H.R. 2436: No comments submitted.

H.R. 2437: No comments submitted.

H.R. 2438: No comments submitted.

H.R. 2439: No comments submitted.

H.R. 2440: No comments submitted.

H.R. 2441: No comments submitted.

H.R. 2442: No comments submitted.

H.R. 2443: No comments submitted.

H.R. 2444: No comments submitted.

H.R. 2445: No comments submitted.

H.R. 2446: No comments submitted.

H.R. 2447: No comments submitted.

H.R. 2448: No comments submitted.

H.R. 2449: No comments submitted.

H.R. 2450: No comments submitted.

H.R. 2451: No comments submitted.

H.R. 2452: No comments submitted.

H.R. 2453: No comments submitted.

H.R. 2454: No comments submitted.

H.R. 2459: No comments submitted.

H.R. 2460: No comments submitted.

H.R. 2461: No comments submitted.

H.R. 2462: No comments submitted.

H.R. 2463: No comments submitted.

H.R. 2464: No comments submitted.

H.R. 2465: No comments submitted.

H.R. 2466: No comments submitted.

H.R. 2467: No comments submitted.

H.R. 2468: No comments submitted.

H.R. 2469:
Micron Technology, Inc., Boise, ID, Roderic W. Lewis, statement..   366
H.R. 2473:
AK Steel Corporation, Middletown, Ohio, James L. Wainscott, 
  letter.........................................................   367
Allegheny Technologies Incorporated, Pittsburgh, PA, Jon D. 
  Walton, statement..............................................   368
H.R. 2473--Continued
American Iron and Steel Institute, Jennifer L. Diggins, statement   369
Barnes & Thornburg LLP, Randolph J. Stayin, Esq., letter.........   370
California Minnesota Honey Farms, Eagle Bend, MN, Jeff Anderson..   371
California Cut Flower Commission, Watsonville, CA, Lee Murphy, 
  letter.........................................................   372
Cattle Producers of Washington, Soap Lake, Washington, Chad 
  Henneman, letter...............................................   374
Committee to Support U.S. Trade Laws, David A. Hartquist, letter.   375
Copper and Brass Fabricators Council, Joseph Mayer, letter.......   376
Council Tool Company, Inc., Lake Waccamaw, North Carolina, John 
  M. Council III, letter.........................................   377
Floral Trade Council, Ovid, Michigan, William R. Carlson, letter.   378
Gerdau Ameristeel, Inc., Tampa, FL, Phillip E. Casey, letter.....   380
Independent Steelworkers Union, Weirton, West Virginia, Mark 
  Glyptis, letter................................................   381
Japan, Government of, Ryozo Kato, Ambassador, statement..........   382
Kansas Cattlemen's Association, Manhattan, Kansas, Doran Junk, 
  letter.........................................................   383
Libbey Inc., Toledo, Ohio, Susan Allene Kovach, letter...........   385
Montana Cattlemen's Association, Billings, Montana, Brett 
  DeBruycker, letter.............................................   387
Pacamor Kubar Bearings, Troy, NY, Augustine J. Sperrazza Jr., 
  letter.........................................................   388
Ranchers-Cattlemen Action Legal Fund, United Stockgrowers of 
  America, Billings, Montana, Leo R. McDonnell, letter...........   390
Sioux Honey Association, Sioux City, Iowa, David Allibone, letter   391
Stewart and Stewart, Terence P. Stewart, letter..................   392
The Garlic Company, Bakersfield, CA, Joe Lane and John Layous, 
  letter.........................................................   395
United States Steel Corporation, Terrence D. Straub, letter......   397
United Steelworkers, William J. Klinefelter, Pittsburgh, PA, 
  letter.........................................................   397
Wellman, Inc., Fort Mill, South Carolina, Thomas M. Duff, letter.   398
H.R. 2477:
Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., Angela Hofmann, letter....................   399
H.R. 2478:
Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., Angela Hofmann, letter....................   400
H.R. 2479:
Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., Angela Hofmann, letter....................   402

H.R. 2480: No comments submitted.

H.R. 2481: No comments submitted.

H.R. 2482: No comments submitted.

H.R. 2483: No comments submitted.

H.R. 2492: No comments submitted.

H.R. 2493: No comments submitted.

H.R. 2494: No comments submitted.

H.R. 2495: No comments submitted.

H.R. 2496: No comments submitted.

H.R. 2497: No comments submitted.

H.R. 2501: No comments submitted.

H.R. 2502: No comments submitted.

H.R. 2503: No comments submitted.

H.R. 2504: No comments submitted.

H.R. 2505: No comments submitted.

H.R. 2506: No comments submitted.

H.R. 2507: No comments submitted.

H.R. 2522: No comments submitted.

H.R. 2523: No comments submitted.

H.R. 2524: No comments submitted.

H.R. 2532: No comments submitted.

H.R. 2535: No comments submitted.

H.R. 2536: No comments submitted.

H.R. 2537:
Clariant Corporation, Coventry, RI, Dan Packer, letter...........   403

H.R. 2538: No comments submitted.

H.R. 2539: No comments submitted.

H.R. 2540: No comments submitted.

H.R. 2542: No comments submitted.

H.R. 2543: No comments submitted.

H.R. 2544: No comments submitted.

H.R. 2545: No comments submitted.

H.R. 2546: No comments submitted.

H.R. 2547: No comments submitted.

H.R. 2548: No comments submitted.

H.R. 2549:
Sun Chemical Corp., Cincinnati, OH, Edwin B. Faulkner, letter....   403

H.R. 2550: No comments submitted.

H.R. 2551: No comments submitted.

H.R. 2552: No comments submitted.

H.R. 2556:
Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., Angela Hofmann, letter....................   404
H.R. 2557:
Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., Angela Hofmann, letter....................   405
H.R. 2573:
Milliken & Company, Joe Salley, letter...........................   407

H.R. 2575: No comments submitted.

H.R. 2576: No comments submitted.

H.R. 2577: No comments submitted.

H.R. 2578: No comments submitted.

H.R. 2579: No comments submitted.

H.R. 2580: No comments submitted.

H.R. 2581: No comments submitted.

H.R. 2582: No comments submitted.

H.R. 2583: No comments submitted.

H.R. 2584: No comments submitted.

H.R. 2585: No comments submitted.

H.R. 2586: No comments submitted.

H.R. 2589:
American Apparel and Footwear Association, Arlington, VA, Stephen 
  E. Lamar, letter...............................................   413
Harodite Industries, Inc., Danville, VA, Dewey M. Rutledge Jr., 
  letter.........................................................   415
H.R. 2590:
American Apparel and Footwear Association, Arlington, VA, Stephen 
  E. Lamar, letter...............................................   415
Harodite Industries, Inc., Danville, VA, Dewey M. Rutledge Jr., 
  letter.........................................................   417
H.R. 2591:
Cheraw Yarn Mills, Cheraw, South Carolina, William M. Malloy, 
  Jr., letter....................................................   418
National Council of Textile Organizations, Cass Johnson, letter..   418
Quaker Fabric Corporation of Fall River, Fall River, MA, Larry A. 
  Liebenow, letter...............................................   420
Richmond Yarns, Inc., Rockingham, NC, Kenneth L. Goodman, Jr., 
  letter.........................................................   421
H.R. 2596:
Motor & Equipment Manufacturers Association, Nancy Noonan, 
  Washington, DC, letter.........................................   422
H.R. 2597:
Motor & Equipment Manufacturers Association, Nancy Noonan, 
  Washington, DC, letter.........................................   423
H.R. 2598:
Motor & Equipment Manufacturers Association, Nancy Noonan, 
  Washington, DC, letter.........................................   424

H.R. 2602: No comments submitted.

H.R. 2603: No comments submitted.

H.R. 2604: No comments submitted.

H.R. 2605: No comments submitted.

H.R. 2606: No comments submitted.

H.R. 2607: No comments submitted.

H.R. 2608: No comments submitted.

H.R. 2609: No comments submitted.

H.R. 2610: No comments submitted.

H.R. 2611: No comments submitted.

H.R. 2612: No comments submitted.

H.R. 2613: No comments submitted.

H.R. 2614: No comments submitted.

H.R. 2615: No comments submitted.

H.R. 2624:
MT Picture Display Corp. of America, Troy, Ohio, letter..........   425
Sony Electronics Inc., Park Ridge, New Jersey, David Newman, 
  letter.........................................................   426

H.R. 2632: No comments submitted.

H.R. 2675: No comments submitted.

H.R. 2676: No comments submitted.

H.R. 2677: No comments submitted.

H.R. 2678: No comments submitted.

H.R. 2696: No comments submitted.

H.R. 2697: No comments submitted.

H.R. 2698: No comments submitted.

H.R. 2699: No comments submitted.

H.R. 2700: No comments submitted.

H.R. 2701: No comments submitted.

H.R. 2702: No comments submitted.

H.R. 2703: No comments submitted.

H.R. 2704: No comments submitted.

H.R. 2705: No comments submitted.

H.R. 2706: No comments submitted.

H.R. 2707: No comments submitted.

H.R. 2708: No comments submitted.

H.R. 2709: No comments submitted.

H.R. 2710: No comments submitted.

H.R. 2711: No comments submitted.

H.R. 2712: No comments submitted.

H.R. 2713: No comments submitted.

H.R. 2714: No comments submitted.

H.R. 2764: No comments submitted.

H.R. 2765: No comments submitted.

H.R. 2766: No comments submitted.

H.R. 2767: No comments submitted.

H.R. 2768: No comments submitted.

H.R. 2769: No comments submitted.

H.R. 2770: No comments submitted.

H.R. 2771: No comments submitted.

H.R. 2772: No comments submitted.

H.R. 2773: No comments submitted.

H.R. 2774: No comments submitted.

H.R. 2775: No comments submitted.

H.R. 2776: No comments submitted.

H.R. 2777: No comments submitted.

H.R. 2781: No comments submitted.

H.R. 2782: No comments submitted.

H.R. 2783: No comments submitted.

H.R. 2784: No comments submitted.

H.R. 2785: No comments submitted.

H.R. 2806: No comments submitted.

H.R. 2809: No comments submitted.

H.R. 2810: No comments submitted.

H.R. 2816:
Association of Food Industries, Inc., Neptune, New Jersey, 
  Jeffrey S. Levin, letter.......................................   426
Del Monte Foods/StarKist Brands, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, Jeff 
  Watters, statement.............................................   427
H.R. 2817:
Spalding, Scott H. Creelman, Springfield, Massachusetts, letter..   428
Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., Angela Hofmann, letter....................   429
H.R. 2818:
Spalding, Scott H. Creelman, Springfield, Massachusetts, letter..   430
Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., Angela Hofmann, letter....................   431
H.R. 2819:
Spalding, Scott H. Creelman, Springfield, Massachusetts, letter..   432
Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., Angela Hofmann, letter....................   433
H.R. 2820:
Spalding, Scott H. Creelman, Springfield, Massachusetts, letter..   434
Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., Angela Hofmann, letter....................   435
H.R. 2821:
Spalding, Scott H. Creelman, Springfield, Massachusetts, letter..   436
Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., Angela Hofmann, letter....................   437

H.R. 2825: No comments submitted.

H.R. 2833:
Chemtura Chemical, Waterbury, CT, Llyod N. Moon, joint letter....   438

H.R. 2836: No comments submitted.

H.R. 2837: No comments submitted.

H.R. 2838: No comments submitted.

H.R. 2839: No comments submitted.

H.R. 2845: No comments submitted.

H.R. 2847: No comments submitted.

H.R. 2848: No comments submitted.

H.R. 2849: No comments submitted.

H.R. 2850: No comments submitted.

H.R. 2851: No comments submitted.

H.R. 2852: No comments submitted.

H.R. 2853: No comments submitted.

H.R. 2854: No comments submitted.

H.R. 2855: No comments submitted.

H.R. 2856:
Spalding, Scott H. Creelman, Springfield, Massachussets, Letter..   439

H.R. 2879: No comments submitted.

H.R. 2880: No comments submitted.

H.R. 2881: No comments submitted.

H.R. 2882: No comments submitted.

H.R. 2883: No comments submitted.

H.R. 2884: No comments submitted.

H.R. 2885: No comments submitted.

H.R. 2886: No comments submitted.

H.R. 2887: No comments submitted.

H.R. 2888: No comments submitted.

H.R. 2889: No comments submitted.

H.R. 2890: No comments submitted.

H.R. 2896:
Grocery Manufacturers Association, Mary Sophos, letter...........   439

H.R. 2906: No comments submitted.

H.R. 2907: No comments submitted.

H.R. 2908: No comments submitted.

H.R. 2909: No comments submitted.

H.R. 2913: No comments submitted.

H.R. 2914: No comments submitted.

H.R. 2915: No comments submitted.

H.R. 2916: No comments submitted.

H.R. 2917: No comments submitted.

H.R. 2918: No comments submitted.

H.R. 2919: No comments submitted.

H.R. 2920: No comments submitted.

H.R. 2921: No comments submitted.

H.R. 2922: No comments submitted.

H.R. 2954:
Chemalloy Company, Inc., Bryn Mawr, PA, Anthony C. Demos, letter.   440
Embassy of South Africa, Barbara Masekela, letter................   441
Manganese Metal Company (Pty) Ltd., Nelspruit, South Africa, 
  Keith Saffy, letter............................................   442
Shieldalloy Metallurgical Corporation, Newfield, New Jersey, 
  Cheryl Ellsworth, letter.......................................   443

H.R. 2972: No comments submitted.

H.R. 2973: No comments submitted.

H.R. 2974: No comments submitted.

H.R. 2975: No comments submitted.

H.R. 2976: No comments submitted.

H.R. 2996:
Charter Brokerage Corporation, Houston, TX, Bobby Waid, letter...   445
Danzas AEI Drawback Services, Houston, TX, James W. Brown, letter   445
H.R. 2997:
Pan American Grain Co., Inc., Guaynabo, PR, Milton Rafael 
  Gonzalez, letter...............................................   446
Agramericas, Inc., Sioux Falls, South Dakota, Kevin R. Deuel, 
  letter.........................................................   446
Charter Brokerage Corporation, Houston, TX, Bobby Waid, letter...   447
Danzas AEI Drawback Services, Houston, TX, James W. Brown, letter   447
Lyondell Chemical Company, Houston, Texas, W. Norman Phillips, 
  letter.........................................................   448
The Connell Company, Berkeley Heights, New Jersey, Grover 
  Connell, letter................................................   448
H.R. 2998:
Charter Brokerage Corporation, Houston, TX, Bobby Waid, letter...   449
Chevron U.S.A. Inc., San Ramon, CA, Ken Kleier, letter...........   450
Danzas AEI Drawback Services, Houston, Texas, J.W. Brown, letter.   450
H.R. 2999:
Charter Brokerage Corporation, Houston, Texas, Bobby Waid, letter   451
Chevron U.S.A. Inc., San Ramon, CA, Ken Kleier, letter...........   451
Danzas AEI Drawback Services, Houston, TX, James W. Brown, letter   451
H.R. 3001:
BP America, Inc., Warrenville, IL, Timothy W. Van Oost, letter...   452
Charter Brokerage Corporation, Houston, TX, Bobby Waid, letter...   452
Chevron U.S.A. Inc., San Ramon, CA, Ken Kleier, letter...........   453
Danzas AEI Drawback Services, Houston, TX, James W. Brown, letter   453
H.R. 3002:
Charter Brokerage Corporation, Houston, TX, Bobby Waid, letter...   453
Danzas AEI Drawback Services, Houston, TX, James W. Brown, letter   454
Pan American Grain Manufacturing Co., Inc., Guaynabo, PR, Milton 
  R. Gonzalez, letter............................................   454
The Connell Company, Berkeley Heights, NJ, Grover Connell, letter   455

H.R. 3015: No comments submitted.

H.R. 3016: No comments submitted.

H.R. 3023: No comments submitted.

H.R. 3024: No comments submitted.

H.R. 3025: No comments submitted.

H.R. 3026: No comments submitted.

H.R. 3027: No comments submitted.

H.R. 3028: No comments submitted.

H.R. 3029: No comments submitted.

H.R. 3030: No comments submitted.

H.R. 3033:
Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., Angela Hofmann, letter....................   455
H.R. 3066:
Deere & Company, Moline, IL, Thomas K. Jarrett, letter...........   457
H.R. 3067:
Deere & Company, Moline, IL, Thomas K. Jarrett, letter...........   458
Ponsse North America Inc., Rhinelander, WI, Ruth H. Nelson, 
  letter and attachment..........................................   459

H.R. 3089: No comments submitted.

H.R. 3090: No comments submitted.

H.R. 3091: No comments submitted.

H.R. 3092: No comments submitted.

H.R. 3093: No comments submitted.

H.R. 3105: No comments submitted.

H.R. 3106: No comments submitted.

H.R. 3112:
Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., Angela Hofmann, letter....................   462
H.R. 3113:
Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., Angela Hofmann, letter....................   464
H.R. 3114:
Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., Angela Hofmann, letter....................   465
H.R. 3115:
Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., Angela Hofmann, letter....................   466
H.R. 3116:
Global Home Products, Westerville, OH, George E. Hamilton, letter   468
Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., Angela Hofmann, letter....................   470
H.R. 3117:
Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., Angela Hofmann, letter....................   472
H.R. 3118:
Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., Angela Hofmann, letter....................   473

H.R. 3119: No comments submitted.

H.R. 3120: No comments submitted.

H.R. 3126: No comments submitted.

H.R. 3176:
United States Association of Importers of Textiles and Apparel, 
  New York, NY, Laura E. Jones, letter...........................   474

H.R. 3210: No comments submitted.

H.R. 3211: No comments submitted.

H.R. 3212: No comments submitted.

H.R. 3213: No comments submitted.

H.R. 3214: No comments submitted.

H.R. 3215: No comments submitted.

H.R. 3216: No comments submitted.

H.R. 3217: No comments submitted.

H.R. 3218: No comments submitted.

H.R. 3219: No comments submitted.

H.R. 3220: No comments submitted.

H.R. 3221: No comments submitted.

H.R. 3222: No comments submitted.

H.R. 3223: No comments submitted.

H.R. 3224: No comments submitted.

H.R. 3225: No comments submitted.

H.R. 3226: No comments submitted.

H.R. 3227: No comments submitted.

H.R. 3228: No comments submitted.

H.R. 3229: No comments submitted.

H.R. 3230: No comments submitted.

H.R. 3231: No comments submitted.

H.R. 3232: No comments submitted.

H.R. 3233: No comments submitted.

H.R. 3234: No comments submitted.

H.R. 3235: No comments submitted.

H.R. 3236: No comments submitted.

H.R. 3237: No comments submitted.

H.R. 3238: No comments submitted.

H.R. 3239: No comments submitted.

H.R. 3240: No comments submitted.

H.R. 3241: No comments submitted.

H.R. 3242: No comments submitted.

H.R. 3243: No comments submitted.

H.R. 3244: No comments submitted.

H.R. 3245: No comments submitted.

H.R. 3246: No comments submitted.

H.R. 3247: No comments submitted.

H.R. 3257: No comments submitted.

H.R. 3258: No comments submitted.

H.R. 3285: No comments submitted.

H.R. 3286: No comments submitted.

H.R. 3287:
Clariant Corporation, Dan Packer, Coventry, RI, letter...........   476

H.R. 3288: No comments submitted.

H.R. 3289:
Clariant Corporation, Dan Packer, Coventry, RI, letter...........   476

H.R. 3290: No comments submitted.

H.R. 3291: No comments submitted.

H.R. 3292: No comments submitted.

H.R. 3293: No comments submitted.

H.R. 3294: No comments submitted.

H.R. 3295: No comments submitted.

H.R. 3303:
ATF, Inc., Lincolnwood, IL, Don Cunningham, letter...............   477
Federal Screw Works, St. Clair Shores, MI, John O'Brien, letter..   477
Illinois Tool Works Inc., Glenview, Illinois, Michael J. Lynch, 
  letter.........................................................   478
Industrial Fasteners Institute, Cleveland, OH, Rob J. Harris, 
  letter.........................................................   478
MacLean-Fogg Company, Mundelein, IL, Timothy Taylor, letter......   479
Seaway Bolt & Specials Corp., Columbia Station, OH, Raymond L. 
  Gurnick, letter................................................   480
Wire Rod Producers Coalition, Paul C. Rosenthal, statement.......   480
H.R. 3308:
Retail Industry Leaders Association, Arlington, VA, Sandra L. 
  Kennedy, letter................................................   482
Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., Angela Hofmann, letter....................   484
H.R. 3309:
Retail Industry Leaders Association, Arlington, VA, Sandra L. 
  Kennedy, letter................................................   485
Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., Angela Hofmann, letter....................   487
H.R. 3310:
Retail Industry Leaders Association, Arlington, VA, Sandra L. 
  Kennedy, letter................................................   488
Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., Angela Hofmann, letter....................   490
H.R. 3311:
Retail Industry Leaders Association, Arlington, VA, Sandra L. 
  Kennedy, letter................................................   491
Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., Angela Hofmann, letter....................   493

H.R. 3340: No comments submitted.

H.R. 3341: No comments submitted.

H.R. 3342: No comments submitted.

H.R. 3343: No comments submitted.

H.R. 3346: No comments submitted.

H.R. 3353:
Charter Brokerage Corporation, Houston, TX, Bobby Waid, letter...   495
Chevron USA, Inc., San Ramon, CA, Ken Kleier, letter.............   495
Danzas AEI Drawback Services, Houston, TX, James W. Brown, letter   495
H.R. 3354:
Charter Brokerage Corporation, Houston, TX, Bobby Waid, letter...   496
Chevron USA, Inc., San Ramon, CA, Ken Kleier, letter.............   496
Danzas AEI Drawback Services, Houston, TX, James W. Brown, letter   497
H.R. 3355:
Charter Brokerage Corporation, Houston, TX, Bobby Waid, letter...   497
Chevron USA, Inc., San Ramon, CA, Ken Kleier, letter.............   497
Danzas AEI Drawback Services, Houston, TX, James W. Brown, letter   498
H.R. 3356:
Danzas AEI Drawback Services, Houston, TX, James W. Brown, letter   498
Charter Brokerage Corporation, Houston, TX, Bobby Waid, letter...   499
H.R. 3357:
Charter Brokerage Corporation, Houston, TX, Bobby Waid, letter...   499
Danzas AEI Drawback Services, Houston, TX, James W. Brown, letter   499
H.R. 3363:
American Association of Exporters & Importers, Hallock Northcott, 
  statement......................................................   500
American Petroleum Institute, Michael Platner, letter............   501
C.J. Holt & Co. Inc., Oradell, New Jersey, Edwin W. Van Ek, 
  letter.........................................................   502
Charter Brokerage Corporation, Houston, Texas, Bobby Waid, letter   503
Comstock & Theakston, Inc., Oradell, NJ, William A. Hagedorn, 
  letter.........................................................   504
Customs Advisory Services, Inc., Atlanta, GA, George Keller, 
  letter.........................................................   505
Danzas AEI Drawback Services, Houston, TX, James W. Brown, letter   506
Florida Citrus Mutual, Lakeland, Florida, Andrew LaVigne, letter.   507
Joint Industry Group, Mary K. Alexander, letter..................   509
The Ad Hoc Drawback Group, San Francisco, California, Neill F. 
  Stroth, Anne-Marie Bush, letter................................   511
Veritrade International, Bellevue, WA, Anne-Marie Bush, letter...   513

H.R. 3371: No comments submitted.

H.R. 3386:
American Apparel and Footwear Association, Arlington, VA, Stephen 
  E. Lamar,letter................................................   515
Footwear Distributors and Retailers of America, Peter T. 
  Mangione, letter...............................................   516
Payless ShoeSource, Topeka, KS, Michael J. Massey, letter........   518
Retail Industry Leaders Association, Arlington, VA, Sandra L. 
  Kennedy, letter................................................   519
Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., Angela Hofmann, letter....................   521
H.R. 3387:
American Apparel and Footwear Association, Arlington, VA, Stephen 
  E. Lamar, letter...............................................   522
H.R. 3387--Continued
Footwear Distributors and Retailers of America, Peter T. 
  Mangione, letter...............................................   524
Payless ShoeSource, Topeka, KS, Michael J. Massey, letter........   525
Retail Industry Leaders Association, Arlington, VA, Sandra L. 
  Kennedy, letter................................................   526
Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., Angela Hofmann, letter....................   528
H.R. 3388:
American Apparel and Footwear Association, Arlington, VA, Stephen 
  E. Lamar, letter...............................................   530
Footwear Distributors and Retailers of America, Peter T. 
  Mangione, letter...............................................   531
Payless ShoeSource, Topeka, KS, Michael J. Massey, letter........   533
Retail Industry Leaders Association, Arlington, VA, Sandra L. 
  Kennedy, letter................................................   534
Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., Angela Hofmann, letter....................   536
H.R. 3389:
American Apparel and Footwear Association, Arlington, VA, Stephen 
  E. Lamar, letter...............................................   537
Footwear Distributors and Retailers of America, Peter T. 
  Mangione, letter...............................................   539
Payless ShoeSource, Topeka, KS, Michael J. Massey, letter........   540
Retail Industry Leaders Association, Arlington, VA, Sandra L. 
  Kennedy, letter................................................   541
Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., Angela Hofmann, letter....................   543
H.R. 3390:
Retail Industry Leaders Association, Arlington, VA, Sandra L. 
  Kennedy, letter................................................   545
H.R. 3391:
American Apparel and Footwear Association, Arlington, VA, Stephen 
  E. Lamar, letter...............................................   546
Footwear Distributors and Retailers of America, Peter T. 
  Mangione, letter...............................................   548
Payless ShoeSource, Topeka, KS, Michael J. Massey, letter........   549
Retail Industry Leaders Association, Arlington, VA, Sandra L. 
  Kennedy, letter................................................   551
Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., Angela Hofmann, letter....................   553
H.R. 3392:
American Apparel and Footwear Association, Arlington, VA, Stephen 
  E. Lamar, letter...............................................   554
Footwear Distributors and Retailers of America, Peter T. 
  Mangione, letter...............................................   555
Payless ShoeSource, Topeka, KS, Michael J. Massey, letter........   557
Retail Industry Leaders Association, Arlington, VA, Sandra L. 
  Kennedy, letter................................................   558
Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., Angela Hofmann, letter....................   560
H.R. 3393:
American Apparel and Footwear Association, Arlington, VA, Stephen 
  E. Lamar, letter...............................................   561
Footwear Distributors and Retailers of America, Peter T. 
  Mangione, letter...............................................   563
Payless ShoeSource, Topeka, KS, Michael J. Massey, letter........   564
Retail Industry Leaders Association, Arlington, VA, Sandra L. 
  Kennedy, letter................................................   566
Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., Angela Hofmann, letter....................   568
H.R. 3394:
American Apparel and Footwear Association, Arlington, VA, Stephen 
  E. Lamar, letter...............................................   569
Footwear Distributors and Retailers of America, Peter T. 
  Mangione, letter...............................................   570
Payless ShoeSource, Topeka, KS, Michael J. Massey, letter........   572
Retail Industry Leaders Association, Arlington, VA, Sandra L. 
  Kennedy, letter................................................   573
Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., Angela Hofmann, letter....................   575
H.R. 3395:
American Apparel and Footwear Association, Arlington, VA, Stephen 
  E. Lamar, letter...............................................   576
Footwear Distributors and Retailers of America, Peter T. 
  Mangione, letter...............................................   578
Payless ShoeSource, Topeka, KS, Michael J. Massey, letter........   579
Retail Industry Leaders Association, Arlington, VA, Sandra L. 
  Kennedy, letter................................................   581
Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., Angela Hofmann, letter....................   583
H.R. 3414:
Meade Instruments Corporation, Peggy Clarke, letter..............   584
H.R. 3415: No comments submitted.
H.R. 3416:
American Apparel and Footwear Association, Arlington, VA, Stephen 
  E. Lamar, letter...............................................   586
National Retail Federation, Erik O. Autor, statement.............   587
H.R 3483:
American Apparel and Footwear Association, Arlington, VA, Stephen 
  E. Lamar, letter...............................................   588
Footwear Distributors and Retailers of America, Peter T. 
  Mangione, letter...............................................   590
Payless ShoeSource, Topeka, KS, Michael J. Massey, letter........   591
Retail Industry Leaders Association, Arlington, VA, Sandra L. 
  Kennedy, letter................................................   592
Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., Angela Hofmann, letter....................   594
H.R. 3484:
American Apparel and Footwear Association, Arlington, VA, Stephen 
  E. Lamar, letter...............................................   596
Footwear Distributors and Retailers of America, Peter T. 
  Mangione, letter...............................................   597
Payless ShoeSource, Topeka, KS, Michael J. Massey, letter........   599
Retail Industry Leaders Association, Arlington, VA, Sandra L. 
  Kennedy, letter................................................   600
Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., Angela Hofmann, letter....................   602
H.R. 3485:
American Apparel and Footwear Association, Arlington, VA, Stephen 
  E. Lamar, letter...............................................   603
Footwear Distributors and Retailers of America, Peter T. 
  Mangione, letter...............................................   605
Payless ShoeSource, Topeka, KS, Michael J. Massey, letter........   606
Retail Industry Leaders Association, Arlington, VA, Sandra L. 
  Kennedy, letter................................................   607
Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., Angela Hofmann, letter....................   609
H.R. 3486:
American Apparel and Footwear Association, Arlington, VA, Stephen 
  E. Lamar, letter...............................................   611
Footwear Distributors and Retailers of America, Peter T. 
  Mangione, letter...............................................   612
Payless ShoeSource, Topeka, KS, Michael J. Massey, letter........   614
Retail Industry Leaders Association, Arlington, VA, Sandra L. 
  Kennedy, letter................................................   615
Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., Angela Hofmann, letter....................   617
H.R. 3487:
American Apparel and Footwear Association, Arlington, VA, Stephen 
  E. Lamar, letter...............................................   618
Footwear Distributors and Retailers of America, Peter T. 
  Mangione, letter...............................................   620
Payless ShoeSource, Topeka, KS, Michael J. Massey, letter........   621
Retail Industry Leaders Association, Arlington, VA, Sandra L. 
  Kennedy, letter................................................   622
Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., Angela Hofmann, letter....................   624
H.R. 3488:
American Apparel and Footwear Association, Arlington, VA, Stephen 
  E. Lamar, letter...............................................   626
Footwear Distributors and Retailers of America, Peter T. 
  Mangione, letter...............................................   627
Payless ShoeSource, Topeka, KS, Michael J. Massey, letter........   629
Retail Industry Leaders Association, Arlington, VA, Sandra L. 
  Kennedy, letter................................................   630
Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., Angela Hofmann, letter....................   632
H.R. 3489:
American Apparel and Footwear Association, Arlington, VA, Stephen 
  E. Lamar, letter...............................................   633
Footwear Distributors and Retailers of America, Peter T. 
  Mangione, letter...............................................   635
Payless ShoeSource, Topeka, KS, Michael J. Massey, letter........   636
Retail Industry Leaders Association, Arlington, VA, Sandra L. 
  Kennedy, letter................................................   637
Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., Angela Hofmann, letter....................   639
H.R. 3490:
American Apparel and Footwear Association, Arlington, VA, Stephen 
  E. Lamar, letter...............................................   641
Footwear Distributors and Retailers of America, Peter T. 
  Mangione, letter...............................................   642
Payless ShoeSource, Topeka, KS, Michael J. Massey, letter........   644
Retail Industry Leaders Association, Arlington, VA, Sandra L. 
  Kennedy, letter................................................   645
Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., Angela Hofmann, letter....................   647
H.R. 3491:
American Apparel and Footwear Association, Arlington, VA, Stephen 
  E. Lamar, letter...............................................   648
Footwear Distributors and Retailers of America, Peter T. 
  Mangione, letter...............................................   650
Payless ShoeSource, Topeka, KS, Michael J. Massey, letter........   651
Retail Industry Leaders Association, Arlington, VA, Sandra L. 
  Kennedy, letter................................................   653
Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., Angela Hofmann, letter....................   654

H.R. 3527: No comments submitted.

H.R. 3528: No comments submitted.

H.R. 3529: No comments submitted.

H.R. 3530: No comments submitted.

H.R. 3531: No comments submitted.

H.R. 3609: No comments submitted.

H.R. 3610: No comments submitted.

H.R. 3611: No comments submitted.

H.R. 3635: No comments submitted.

H.R. 3636: No comments submitted.


                                     

ADVISORY

FROM THE 
COMMITTEE
 ON WAYS 
AND 
MEANS

                         SUBCOMMITTEE ON TRADE

                                                CONTACT: (202) 225-0649
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
July 25, 2005
No. TR-3

                       Shaw Announces Request for

              Written Comments on Technical Corrections to

                 U.S. Trade Laws and Miscellaneous Duty

                            Suspension Bills

    Congressman E. Clay Shaw, Jr. (R-FL), Chairman, Subcommittee on 
Trade of the Committee on Ways and Means, today announced that the 
Subcommittee is requesting written comments for the record from all 
parties interested in technical corrections to U.S. trade laws and 
miscellaneous duty suspension proposals.
      

BACKGROUND:

      
    On March 10, 2005, Chairman Shaw requested that all Members who 
planned to introduce technical corrections and miscellaneous duty 
suspension legislation do so by April 28, 2005. Chairman Shaw is now 
requesting public comment on those bills listed below and is requesting 
budget scoring estimates from the Congressional Budget Office. The 
deadline for the public to submit written comments to the Committee is 
Friday, September 2, 2005. After the comment period, the Subcommittee 
will review all comments and determine which bills should be included 
in a miscellaneous trade package. The Subcommittee will consider the 
extent to which the bills create a revenue loss, operate retroactively, 
attract controversy, or are not administrable.
      

DETAILS FOR SUBMISSION OF WRITTEN COMMENTS:

      
    Please Note: Any person(s) and/or organization(s) wishing to submit 
for the record must follow the appropriate link on the hearing page of 
the Committee website and complete the informational forms. From the 
Committee homepage, http://waysandmeans.house.gov, select ``109th 
Congress'' from the menu entitled, ``Hearing Archives'' (http://
waysandmeans.house.gov/Hearings.asp?congress=17). Select the request 
for written comments for which you would like to submit, and click on 
the link entitled, ``Click here to provide a submission for the 
record.'' Once you have followed the online instructions, completing 
all informational forms and clicking ``submit'' on the final page, an 
email will be sent to the address which you supply confirming your 
interest in providing a submission for the record. You MUST REPLY to 
the email and ATTACH your submission as a Word or WordPerfect document, 
in compliance with the formatting requirements listed below, by close 
of business Friday, September 2, 2005. Finally, please note that due to 
the change in House mail policy, the U.S. Capitol Police will refuse 
sealed-package deliveries to all House Office Buildings. For questions, 
or if you encounter technical problems, please call (202) 225-1721.
      

FORMATTING REQUIREMENTS:

      
    The Committee relies on electronic submissions for printing the 
official hearing record. As always, submissions will be included in the 
record according to the discretion of the Committee. The Committee will 
not alter the content of your submission, but we reserve the right to 
format it according to our guidelines. Any submission provided to the 
Committee by a witness, any supplementary materials submitted for the 
printed record, and any written comments in response to a request for 
written comments must conform to the guidelines listed below. Any 
submission or supplementary item not in compliance with these 
guidelines will not be printed, but will be maintained in the Committee 
files for review and use by the Committee.
      
    1. All submissions and supplementary materials must be provided in 
Word or WordPerfect format and MUST NOT exceed a total of 10 pages, 
including attachments. Witnesses and submitters are advised that the 
Committee relies on electronic submissions for printing the official 
hearing record.
      
    2. Copies of whole documents submitted as exhibit material will not 
be accepted for printing. Instead, exhibit material should be 
referenced and quoted or paraphrased. All exhibit material not meeting 
these specifications will be maintained in the Committee files for 
review and use by the Committee.
      
    3. All submissions must include a list of all clients, persons, 
and/ororganizations on whose behalf the witness appears. A supplemental 
sheet must accompany each submission listing the name, company, 
address, telephone and fax numbers of each witness.
      

SUMMARY OF BILLS:

Duty Suspension or Reduction bills:

      
    H.R. 53--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on chloroneb.
    H.R. 178--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on Dichloroethyl 
Ether.
    H.R. 445--A bill to amend section 304 of the Tariff Act of 1930 
with respect to the marking of imported home furniture.
    H.R. 521--A bill to impose tariff-rate quotas on certain casein and 
milk protein concentrates.
    H.R. 617--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on p-nitrobenzoic 
acid (PNBA).
    H.R. 636--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on Allyl 
Pentaerythritol (APE).
    H.R. 637--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on Butyl Ethyl 
Propanediol (BEPD).
    H.R. 638--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on BEPD70L.
    H.R. 639--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on Boltorn-1 
(Bolt-1).
    H.R. 640--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on Boltorn-2 
(Bolt-2).
    H.R. 641--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on Cyclic TMP 
Formal (CTF).
    H.R. 642--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on DiTMP.
    H.R. 643--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on Polyol DPP 
(DPP).
    H.R. 644--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on Hydroxypivalic 
Acid (HPA).
    H.R. 645--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on TMPDE.
    H.R. 646--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on TMPME.
    H.R. 647--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on TMP Oxetane 
(TMPO).
    H.R. 648--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on TMPO Ethoxylate 
(TMPOE).
    H.R. 707--A bill to amend the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the 
United States with respect to rattan webbing.
    H.R. 1068--A bill to maintain and expand the steel import licensing 
and monitoring program.
    H.R. 1115--A bill to amend the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the 
United States to clarify the tariff rate for certain mechanics' gloves.
    H.R. 1121--A bill to repeal section 754 of the Tariff Act of 1930.
    H.R. 1202--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on unidirectional 
(cardioid) electret condenser microphone modules for use in motor 
vehicles.
    H.R. 1221--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on certain rubber 
or plastic footwear.
    H.R. 1230--A bill to extend trade benefits to certain tents 
imported into the United States.
    H.R. 1274--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on amyl-
anthraquinone.
    H.R. 1336--A bill to amend the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the 
United States to clairfy the classification of laser light sources for 
semiconductor manufacturing.
    H.R. 1391--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on allyl ureido 
monomer.
    H.R. 1392--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on methacrylamido 
etheleneurae monomer.
    H.R. 1407--A bill to provide that certain wire rods shall not be 
subject to any antidumping duty or countervailing duty order.
    H.R. 1444--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on certain 
meatless frozen food products.
    H.R. 1464--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on certain 
pimientos (capsicum anuum), prepared or preserved otherwise than by 
vinegar or acetic acid.
    H.R. 1465--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on certain 
pimientos (capsicum anuum), prepared or preserved by vinegar or acetic 
acid.
    H.R. 1466--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on certain 
pimientos (capsicum anuum), prepared or preserved otherwise than by 
vinegar or acetic acid.
    H.R. 1534--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on certain 
synthetic staple fibers that are not carded, combed, or otherwise 
processed for spinning.
    H.R. 1535--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on acrylic or 
modacrylic synthetic filament tow.
    H.R. 1536--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on certain 
synthetic staple fibers that are carded, combed, or otherwise processed 
for spinning.
    H.R. 1537--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on 
nitrocellulose.
    H.R. 1609--A bill to reduce until December 31, 2008, the duty on 
potassium sorbate.
    H.R. 1610--A bill to reduce until December 31, 2008, the duty on 
sorbic acid.
    H.R. 1698--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on certain capers 
preserved by vinegar or acetic acid.
    H.R. 1699--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on certain 
pepperoncini prepared or preserved otherwise than by vinegar or acetic 
acid.
    H.R. 1700--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on certain capers 
preserved by vinegar or acetic acid.
    H.R. 1701--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on certain 
pepperoncini prepared or preserved by vinegar or acetic acid in 
concentrations at 0.5% or greater.
    H.R. 1702--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on certain 
pepperoncini prepared or preserved otherwise than by vinegar or acetic 
acid in concentrations less than 0.5%.
    H.R. 1715--A bill to reduce until December 31, 2008, the duty on 
PDCB (p-Dichlorobenzene).
    H.R. 1724--A bill to extend the temporary suspension of duty on 
Asulam sodium salt.
    H.R. 1725--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on Chloral.
    H.R. 1726--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on Imidacloprid 
Technical.
    H.R. 1727--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on Triadimefon.
    H.R. 1732--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on Liquid Crystal 
Device (LCD) panel assemblies for use in LCD projection type 
televisions.
    H.R. 1733--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on electron guns 
for high definition cathode ray tubes (CRTs).
    H.R. 1734--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on Liquid Crystal 
Device (LCD) panel assemblies for use in LCD direct view televisions.
    H.R. 1752--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on Polyethylene 
HE2591.
    H.R. 1775--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on Thiacloprid.
    H.R. 1777--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on Pyrimethanil.
    H.R. 1778--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on Foramsulfuron.
    H.R. 1779--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on Fenamidone.
    H.R. 1780--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on Cyclanilide 
Technical.
    H.R. 1781--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on para-
Benzoquinone.
    H.R. 1782--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on palmitic acid.
    H.R. 1783--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on Anisidine.
    H.R. 1784--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on Tetrakis.
    H.R. 1785--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on 2,4-Xylidine.
    H.R. 1786--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on 
CroTonaldehyde.
    H.R. 1787--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on t-Butyl 
acrylate.
    H.R. 1788--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on propyl 
gallate.
    H.R. 1799--A bill to extend the duty suspension on ORGASOL 
polyamide powders.
    H.R. 1802--A bill to amend the Tariff Act of 1930 with respect to 
the marking of imported live bovine animals.
    H.R. 1813--A bill to require the payment of interest on amounts 
owed by the United States pursuant to the reliquidation of certain 
entries under the Tariff Suspension and Trade Act of 2000 and the 
Miscellaneous Trade and Technical Corrections Act of 2004.
    H.R. 1824--A bill to provide for the duty-free entry of certain 
tramway cars and associated spare parts for use by the city of 
Portland, Oregon.
    H.R. 1826--A bill to extend the temporary suspension of duty on 2-
Chlorobenzyl chloride.
    H.R. 1827--A bill to extend the temporary suspension of duty on 
(Z)-(1RS,3RS)-3-(2-Chloro-3,3,3-trifluro-1-propenyl)-2,2- 
imethylcyclopropanecarboxylic acid.
    H.R. 1828--A bill to extend the temporary suspension of duty on 
(S)-Alpha-Hydroxy-3-phenoxybenzeneacetonitrile.
    H.R. 1829--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on Butanedioic 
acid, dimethyl ester, polymer with 4-hydroxy-2,2,6,6,-tetramethyl-1-
piperidineethanol.
    H.R. 1830--A bill to extend the duty suspension on 3-amino-2-
(sulfato-ethyl sulfonyl) ethyl benzamide.
    H.R. 1831--A bill to extend the duty suspension on MUB 738 INT.
    H.R. 1832--A bill to extend the suspension of duty on 5-amino-N-(2-
hydroxyethyl)-2,3-xylenesulfonamide.
    H.R. 1833--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on mixtures of 
1,3,5-Triazine-2,4,6-triamine,N,N-[1,2-ethane-diyl-bis [ [ [4,6-bis-
[butyl (1,2,2,6,6-pentamethyl-4-piperidinyl)amino]-1,3,5-triazine-2-yl] 
imino]-3,1-propanediyl] ] bis[N,N-dibutyl-N,N-bis(1,2,2,6,6-
pentamethyl-4-piperidinyl)- and Butanedioic acid, dimethylester polymer 
with 4-hyroxy-2,2,6,6-tetramethyl-1-piperdine ethanol.
    H.R. 1838--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on 3-Cyclohexene-
1-carboxylic acid, 6-[(di-2-propenylamino)carbonyl]-,(1R,6R)-rel-, 
reaction products with pentafluoroiodoethane-tetrefluoroethylene 
telomer, ammonium salt.
    H.R. 1839--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on Glycine, N,N-
Bis[2-hydroxy-3-(2-propenyloxy)propyl]-, monosodium salt, reaction 
products with ammonium hydroxide and pentafluoroiodoethane-
tetrafluoroethylyene telomer.
    H.R. 1840--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on 5,5-bis[(y,w-
perfluoroC4-20alkylthio)methyl]-2-hydroxy-2-oxo -1,3,2-
dioxaphosphorinane, ammonium salt and 2,2-bis[(y,w-perfluoroC4-
20alkylthio)methyl]-3-hydroxy proply phosphate, di-ammonium salt and 
Di-[2,2-bis[(y,w-perfluoroC4-20alkylthio)methyl]]-3-hydroxy proply 
phosphate, ammonium salt and 2,2-bis[(y,w-perfluoroC4-
20alkylthio)methyl]-1,3-di-(dihydro genphosphate)-propane, tetra-
ammonium salt.
    H.R. 1841--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on 1(3H)-
Isobenzofuranone, 3,3-bis(2-methyl-1-octyl-1H-indol-3-yl).
    H.R. 1842--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on a mixture of 
Poly[[6-[(1,1,3,3-tetramethylbutyl)amino]-1,3,5-triazine-2,4 
diyl][(2,2,6,6-tetramethyl-4-piperidinyl)imino]-1,6-exanediy [(2,2,6,6-
tetramethyl-4-piperidinyl)imino]]) and Bis(2,2,6,6,-tetramethyl-4-
piperidyl)sebaceate.
    H.R. 1843--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on MCPA.
    H.R. 1844--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on Bronate 
Advanced.
    H.R. 1845--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on Bromoxynil 
Octanoate Tech.
    H.R. 1846--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on Bromoxynil 
MEO.
    H.R. 1848--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on certain 
bitumen-coated polyethylene sleeves specifically designed to protect 
in-ground wood posts.
    H.R. 1851--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on nylon 
woolpacks used to package wool.
    H.R. 1854--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on magnesium zinc 
aluminum hydroxide carbonate hydrate.
    H.R. 1855--A bill to extend the temporary suspension of duty on 
magnesium aluminum hydroxide carbonate hydrate.
    H.R. 1856--A bill to extend the temporary duty suspension on C12-18 
Alkenes.
    H.R. 1857--A bill to extend the temporary suspension of duty on 
polytetramethylene ether glycol.
    H.R. 1858--A bill to extend the temporary suspension of duty on 
cis-3-Hexen-1-ol.
    H.R. 1877--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on hydraulic 
control units.
    H.R. 1878--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on shield asy-
steering gear.
    H.R. 1880--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on 2,4-
Dichloroaniline.
    H.R. 1881--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on 2-
Acetylbutyrolactone.
    H.R. 1882--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on Alkylketone.
    H.R. 1883--A bill to reduce temporarily the duty on Cyfluthrin 
(Baythroid).
    H.R. 1884--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on Beta-
cyfluthrin.
    H.R. 1885--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on Deltamethrin.
    H.R. 1886--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on cyclopropane-
1,1-dicarboxylic acid, dimethyl ester.
    H.R. 1887--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on Spiroxamine.
    H.R. 1888--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on Spiromesifen.
    H.R. 1889--A bill to extend the temporary suspension of duty on 
Ethoprop.
    H.R. 1890--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on Propiconazole.
    H.R. 1891--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on 4-
Chlorobenzaldehyde.
    H.R. 1892--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on Oxadiazon.
    H.R. 1893--A bill to extend the temporary suspension of duty on 2-
Chlorobenzyl chloride.
    H.R. 1894--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on NaHP.
    H.R. 1895--A bill to extend the temporary suspension of duty on 
Iprodione.
    H.R. 1896--A bill to extend the temporary suspension of duty on 
Fosetyl-Al.
    H.R. 1897--A bill to extend the temporary suspension of duty on 
Flufenacet (FOE Hydroxy).
    H.R. 1899--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on Phosphorus 
Thiochloride.
    H.R. 1900--A bill to extend the temporary suspension of duty on 
Methanol, sodium salt.
    H.R. 1901--A bill to reduce temporarily the duty on 
Trifloxystrobin.
    H.R. 1903--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on phosphoric 
acid, lanthanum salt, cerium terbium-doped.
    H.R. 1904--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on lutetium 
oxide.
    H.R. 1906--A bill to reduce temporarily the duty on ACM.
    H.R. 1907--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on Permethrin.
    H.R. 1908--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on Thidiazuron.
    H.R. 1909--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on Flutolanil.
    H.R. 1910--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on Resmethrin.
    H.R. 1911--A bill to reduce temporarily the duty on Clothianidin.
    H.R. 1913--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on ACRYPET UT100.
    H.R. 1914--A bill to amend the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the 
United States to provide that the calculation of the duty imposed on 
imported cherries that are provisionally preserved does not include the 
weight of the preservative materials of the cherries.
    H.R. 1915--A bill to reduce temporarily the duty on diethyl ketone.
    H.R. 1916--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on 5-Amino-1-
[2,6-dichloro-4- (tri fluoro methyl)phenyl]-4-[(1R,S)-(tri 
fluoromethyl)-sulfiny] -1H-pyrazole-3-carbonitrile.
    H.R. 1917--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on 2,3-
Pyridinedicarboxylic acid.
    H.R. 1918--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on 80% 2,3-
Dimethylbutylnitrile and 20% toluene.
    H.R. 1919--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on 2,3-
Quinolinedicarboxylic acid.
    H.R. 1920--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on p-
Chlorophenylglycine.
    H.R. 1921--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on 3,5-
Difluoroaniline.
    H.R. 1922--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on 1,3-Dibromo-5-
dimethyl-hydantoin.
    H.R. 1923--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on booster and 
master cyl asy-brake.
    H.R. 1924--A bill to reduce temporarily the duty on certain 
transaxles.
    H.R. 1925--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on converter asy.
    H.R. 1926--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on module and 
bracket asy-power steering.
    H.R. 1927--A bill to reduce temporarily the duty on unit asy-
battery hi volt.
    H.R. 1928--A bill to allow the entry of certain United States-
origin defense articles into bonded warehouses and foreign-trade zones.
    H.R. 1934--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on certain vinyl 
chloride-vinyl acetate copolymers.
    H.R. 1935--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on Clomazone.
    H.R. 1936--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on Flonicamid.
    H.R. 1937--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on Bifenthrin.
    H.R. 1938--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on Chloropivaloyl 
Chloride.
    H.R. 1941--A bill to reduce temporarily the duty on triethylene 
glycol bis[3-(3-tert-butyl-4-hydroxy-5-methyl phenyl)propionate].
    H.R. 1944--A bill to reduce temporarily the duty on certain 
articles of natural cork.
    H.R. 1945--A bill to provide temporary duty reductions for certain 
cotton fabrics, and for other purposes.
    H.R. 1947--A bill to provide for the reliquidation of certain 
entries of soundspa clock radios.
    H.R. 1948--A bill to provide for the reliquidation of certain 
entries of aquascape relaxation bubble lights.
    H.R. 1949--A bill to provide for the reliquidation of certain 
entries of candles.
    H.R. 1959--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on glyoxylic 
acid.
    H.R. 1962--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on 
cyclopentanone.
    H.R. 1963--A bill to reduce temporarily the duty on Mesotrione 
Technical.
    H.R. 1964--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on Malonic Acid-
Dinitrile 50% NMP.
    H.R. 1965--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on formulations 
of NOA 466510.
    H.R. 1966--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on DEMBB 
Distilled-ISO Tank.
    H.R. 1967--A bill to extend the suspension of duty on Acid black 
172.
    H.R. 1968--A bill to extend the suspension of duty on a certain 
chemical mixture.
    H.R. 1969--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on N,N'-hexane-
1,6-diylbis(3-(3,5-di-tert-butyl-4-hydroxyphenyl opionamide)).
    H.R. 1970--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on 2-
Naphthalenesulfonic acid, 7,7'' - [(2-methyl-1,5-pentanediyl) 
bis[imino(6-fluoro-1,3,5-triazine-4,2-diyl) imino]] bis[ 4-hydroxy-3-
[(4-methoxy sulfophenyl) azo]-, potassium sodium salt.
    H.R. 1971--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on 2,7-
Naphthalenedisulfonic acid,5-[[4-chloro-6-[[3-[[8-[4-fluoro-6- 
(methylphenylamino)-1,3,5-triazin-2-yl]amino]-1-hydroxy-3,6- disulfo-2-
naphthalenyl]azo]-4-sulfophenyl],amino]-1,3,5-tria in-2-yl]amino]-4-
hydroxy-3-[(1-sulfo-2-naphthalenyl)azo]-sodium salt.
    H.R. 1976--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on Gamma Methyl 
Ionone.
    H.R. 1978--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on certain 
acrylic fiber tow.
    H.R. 1979--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on certain 
acrylic fiber tow.
    H.R. 1990--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on MKH 6561 
Isocyanate.
    H.R. 1991--A bill to extend the temporary suspension of duty with 
respect to Diclofop methyl.
    H.R. 1992--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on endosulfan.
    H.R. 1997--A bill to amend the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the 
United States to clarify the article description relating to certain 
monchrome glass envelopes, and for other purposes.
    H.R. 2003--A bill to amend the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the 
United States to remove the 100 percent tariff imposed on Roquefort 
cheese.
    H.R. 2009--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on Tetraconazole.
    H.R. 2010--A bill to reduce temporarily the duty on M-Alcohol.
    H.R. 2015--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on certain 
machines for use in the assembly of motorcycle wheels.
    H.R. 2016--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on glass bulbs, 
designed for sprinkler systems and other release devices, filled with 
liquid that expands and breaks the bulb at a release temperature 
predetermined by the manufacturer.
    H.R. 2019--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on Pyriproxyfen.
    H.R. 2020--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on Uniconazole.
    H.R. 2021--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on Acephate.
    H.R. 2022--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on Bispyribac-
sodium.
    H.R. 2023--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on Dinotefuran.
    H.R. 2024--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on Etoxazole.
    H.R. 2025--A bill to extend the suspension of duty on 
Fenpropathrin.
    H.R. 2026--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on Bioallethrin.
    H.R. 2027--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on Deltamethrin.
    H.R. 2028--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on 
Esbioallethrin.
    H.R. 2029--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on Resmethrin.
    H.R. 2030--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on Tetramethrin.
    H.R. 2031--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on Tralemethrin.
    H.R. 2032--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on flumiclorac 
pentyl ester.
    H.R. 2033--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on Flumioxazin.
    H.R. 2056--A bill to reduce temporarily the duty on palm fatty acid 
distillate.
    H.R. 2077--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on Garenoxacin 
mesylate.
    H.R. 2078--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on butylated 
hydroxyethylbenzene.
    H.R. 2079--A bill to extend the temporary duty suspension on 
Ezetimibe.
    H.R. 2080--A bill to extend the duty suspension on Methidathion 
Technical.
    H.R. 2081--A bill to extend the duty suspension on difenoconazole.
    H.R. 2082--A bill to extend the duty suspension on Lambda-
Cyhalothrin.
    H.R. 2083--A bill to extend the duty suspension on cyprodinil.
    H.R. 2084--A bill to extend the duty suspension on Wakil XL.
    H.R. 2085--A bill to extend the duty suspension on Azoxystrobin 
Technical.
    H.R. 2086--A bill to extend the duty suspension on mucochloric 
acid.
    H.R. 2091--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on 4-Methoxy-2-
methyldiphenylamine.
    H.R. 2093--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on 2-
Methylhydroquinone.
    H.R. 2094--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on thionyl 
chloride.
    H.R. 2095--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on 1-fluoro-2-
nitro benzene.
    H.R. 2096--A bill to extend the temporary suspension of duty on 
certain high tenacity rayon filament yarn.
    H.R. 2114--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on 1-propene-2-
methyl homopolymer.
    H.R. 2115--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on Acronal-S-600.
    H.R. 2116--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on Lucirin TPO.
    H.R. 2117--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on Astacin Finish 
PUM.
    H.R. 2118--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on Sokalan PG 
IME.
    H.R. 2119--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on Paliotol 
Yellow L 2140 HD.
    H.R. 2120--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on Lycopene 10% 
25kg 4G 3.
    H.R. 2128--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on cosmetic bags 
with a flexible outer surface of reinforced or laminated polyvinyl 
chloride (PVC).
    H.R. 2135--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on Mixtures of 
methyl 4-iodo-2-[3-(4-methoxy-6-methyl-1,3,5-triazin-2-yl)ureidosul 
fonyl]benzoate, sodium salt (Iodosulfuron) and application adjuvants.
    H.R. 2136--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on Ethyl 4,5-
dihydro-5,5-diphenyl-1,2-oxazole-3-carboxylate (Isoxadifen-ethyl).
    H.R. 2137--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on 5-Cyclopropyl-
4-(2-methylsulfonyl-4-trifluoromethylbenxoyl)i soxazole (Isoxaflutole).
    H.R. 2138--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on Mixtures of 
methyl 2-(4,5-dihydro-4-methyl-5-oxo-3-propoxy-1H-1,2,4-triazol-1-y 
l)carboxamidosulfonylbenzoate; sodium (4,5-dihydro-4-methyl-5-oxo-3-
propoxy-1H-1,2,4-triazol-1-ylc arbonyl) (2-methoxy 
carbonylphenylsulfonyl) azanide (Propoxycarbazone), methyl 4-iodo-2-[3-
(4-methoxy-6-methyl-1,3,5-triazin-2-yl) ureidosulfonyl[benzoate, sodium 
salt (Mesosulfuron-methyl), and application adjuvants.
    H.R. 2139--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on Methyl 2-
[(4,6-dimethoxypyrimidin-2-ylcarbamoyl)sulfamoyl]-G6a-(met 
hanesulfonamido)-p-toluate whether or not mixed with application 
adjuvants.
    H.R. 2140--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on Mixtures of 
N,N-dimethyl-2[3-(4,6-dimethoxypyrimidin-2-yl)ureidosulfonyl ]-4-
formylaminobenzamide (Foramsulfuron), methyl 4-iodo-2-[3-(4-methoxy-6-
methyl-1,3,5-triazin-2-yl)ureidosul fonyl]benzoate, sodium salt 
(Iodosulfuron), and application adjuvants.
    H.R. 2141--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on 1-Propanone, 
2-methyl-1-[4- (methylthio)phenyl]-2-(4- morpholinyl)-(9cl).
    H.R. 2142--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on 1,6-
Hexanediamine, N,N'- bis(2,2,6,6-tetramethyl-4- piperidinyl)-, polymer 
with 2,4,6-trichloro-1,3,5-triazine, reaction products with N-butyl- 1-
butanamine and N-butyl- 2,2,6,6-tetramethyl-4- piperidinamine.
    H.R. 2143--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on Anthra[2,1,9-
mna]naphth[2,3-h]acridine-5,10,15(16H)-trione,3 -[(9,10-dihydro-9,10-
dioxo-1-anthracenyl)amino].
    H.R. 2144--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on Cobaltate(1-), 
bis[3-[[1-(3- chlorophenyl)-4,5-dihydro-3- methyl-5-(oxo-.kappa.O)-1H- 
pyrazol-4-yl]azo-.kappa.N1[-4-. (hydroxy-.kappa.O)- benzenesulfonamid- 
ato(2-)]-, sodium.
    H.R. 2145--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on TMQ.
    H.R. 2146--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on 4-ADPA.
    H.R. 2147--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on Vulkanox MB 
(MBI).
    H.R. 2148--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on Vulcuren UPKA 
1988.
    H.R. 2149--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on Vullcanox 4010 
NA/LG.
    H.R. 2150--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on Vulkazon AFS/
LG.
    H.R. 2151--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on Vulkacit MOZ/
LG and Vulkacit MOZ/SG.
    H.R. 2152--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on Vulkanox ZMB-
2/C5.
    H.R. 2153--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on Anisic 
Aldehyde.
    H.R. 2154--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on Methyl 
Salicylate.
    H.R. 2155--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on 1,2 
Octanediol.
    H.R. 2156--A bill to extend the duty suspension on 2, 2-Dimethyl-3-
(3-methylphenyl) propanal.
    H.R. 2157--A bill to extend the duty suspension on p-
Methylacetophenone.
    H.R. 2158--A bill to extend the duty suspension on Cyclohexadec-8-
en-l-one.
    H.R. 2159--A bill to extend the duty suspension on methanol, sodium 
salt.
    H.R. 2160--A bill to extend the duty suspension on 2-
Phenylbenzimidazole-5-sulfonic acid.
    H.R. 2161--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on 1,2 
Pentanediol.
    H.R. 2162--A bill to extend the duty suspension on Methyl 
cinnamate.
    H.R. 2163--A bill to extend the duty suspension on cyclohexanol.
    H.R. 2164--A bill to extend the duty suspension on Thymol.
    H.R. 2165--A bill to extend the duty suspension on Menthyl 
anthranilate.
    H.R. 2166--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on Frescolat MGA.
    H.R. 2167--A bill to extend the duty suspension on o-tert-
Butylcyclohexanol.
    H.R. 2168--A bill to extend the duty suspension on 5-Methyl-2-
(methylethyl) cyclohexyl-2-hydroxypropanoate.
    H.R. 2169--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on Cohedur RL.
    H.R. 2170--A bill to extend the duty suspension on isothiocyanate.
    H.R. 2171--A bill to extend the temporary suspension of duty on 
Vulkalent E/C.
    H.R. 2172--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on MBTS.
    H.R. 2173--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on 1,2 
Hexanediol.
    H.R. 2175--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on certain rayon 
staple fibers.
    H.R. 2179--A bill to extend the suspension of duty on hexanedioic 
acid, polymer with 1,3-benzenedimethanamine.
    H.R. 2198--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on fixed ratio 
speed changers for truck-mounted concrete mixers.
    H.R. 2212--A bill to extend the temporary suspension of duty on 
Trinexapac-Ethyl.
    H.R. 2213--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on formulations 
of Prosulfuron.
    H.R. 2214--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on formulations 
of triasulfuron and dicamba.
    H.R. 2215--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on formulations 
of triasulfuron.
    H.R. 2220--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on Pontamine 
Green 2B.
    H.R. 2221--A bill to extend the duty suspension on Mesamoll.
    H.R. 2222--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on Bayderm Bottom 
10 UD.
    H.R. 2223--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on Bayderm Finish 
DLH.
    H.R. 2224--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on Levagard DMPP.
    H.R. 2225--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on Bayderm Bottom 
DLV.
    H.R. 2226--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on certain 
ethylene-vinyl acetate copolymers.
    H.R. 2227--A bill to extend the duty suspension on ortho-
phenylphenol.
    H.R. 2228--A bill to extend the duty suspension on 
Iminodisuccinate.
    H.R. 2241--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on Lewatit.
    H.R. 2242--A bill to extend the temporary suspension of duty on 
certain ion-exchange resins.
    H.R. 2243--A bill to extend the temporary suspension of duty on 2,6 
Dichlorotoluene.
    H.R. 2244--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on Glyoxylic Acid 
50%.
    H.R. 2245--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on 
paraChlorophenol.
    H.R. 2246--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on allethrin.
    H.R. 2252--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on Permethrin.
    H.R. 2253--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on Cyazofamid.
    H.R. 2254--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on Cypermethrin.
    H.R. 2255--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on on Flonicamid.
    H.R. 2256--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on Zeta-
Cypermethrin.
    H.R. 2260--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on certain 
adsorbent resins.
    H.R. 2261--A bill to extend the suspension of duty on a certain ion 
exchange resin.
    H.R. 2262--A bill to extend the suspension of duty on a certain ion 
exchange resin.
    H.R. 2263--A bill to extend the suspension of duty on 10'10' 
Oxybisphenoxarsine.
    H.R. 2264--A bill to extend the suspension of duty on Copper 8-
quinolinolate.
    H.R. 2265--A bill to extend the suspension of duty on a certain ion 
exchange resin.
    H.R. 2266--A bill to extend the suspension of duty on a certain ion 
exchange resin.
    H.R. 2267--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on a certain ion 
exchange resin powder.
    H.R. 2268--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on a certain ion 
exchange resin powder. H.R. 2269--A bill to extend the temporary 
suspension of duty on helium. H.R. 2270--A bill to suspend temporarily 
the duty on Desmodur E 14. H.R. 2271--A bill to suspend temporarily the 
duty on Desmodur, IL.
    H.R. 2272--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on Desmodur HL.
    H.R. 2273--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on Desmodur VP LS 
2253.
    H.R. 2274--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on Desmodur R-E.
    H.R. 2275--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on Walocel MW 
3000 PFV.
    H.R. 2276--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on TSME.
    H.R. 2277--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on Walocel VP-M 
20660.
    H.R. 2278--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on Citral.
    H.R. 2279--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on XAMA 2.
    H.R. 2280--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on XAMA 7.
    H.R. 2281--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on 2-Ethylhexyl 
4-methoxycinnamate.
    H.R. 2282--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on 4-
Methoxybenzaldehyde.
    H.R. 2285--A bill to extend the temporary suspension of duty on 
certain bags for toys.
    H.R. 2286--A bill to extend the temporary suspension of duty on 
cases for certain children's products.
    H.R. 2287--A bill to extend the temporary suspension of duty on 
certain children's products.
    H.R. 2288--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on certain cases 
for toys.
    H.R. 2289--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on certain cases 
for toys.
    H.R. 2302--A bill to extend the suspension of duty on certain 12-
volt batteries.
    H.R. 2303--A bill to extend the suspension of duty on certain light 
absorbing photo dyes.
    H.R. 2309--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on Aniline 2.5 
Di-sulphonic Acid.
    H.R. 2310--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on 1,4-
Benzenedicarboxylic Acid, Polymer With N,N-Bis (2-Aminoethyl) -1,2-
Ethanediamine, Cyclized, Me Sulfates.
    H.R. 2311--A bill to extend the temporary suspension of duty on 
certain high-performance loudspeakers.
    H.R. 2312--A bill to extend the temporary suspension of duty on 
certain R-core transformers.
    H.R. 2313--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on Sulfur Blue 7.
    H.R. 2314--A bill to extend the suspension of duty on reduced vat 
blue 43.
    H.R. 2315--A bill to extend the suspension of duty on sulfur black 
1.
    H.R. 2316--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on Diresul Brown 
GN Liquid Crude.
    H.R. 2336--A bill to extend the temporary suspension of duty on 
DMSIP.
    H.R. 2371--A bill to extend the temporary suspension of duty on 
bitolylene diisocyanate (TODI).
    H.R. 2372--A bill to extend the temporary suspension of duty on 2-
(Methoxycarbonyl)benzylsulfonamide.
    H.R. 2373--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on 2-
chlorobenzenesulfonamide.
    H.R. 2374--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on ESPI.
    H.R. 2375--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on CMBSI.
    H.R. 2377--A bill to reduce temporarily the duty on certain 
automotive catalytic converter mats.
    H.R. 2380--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on gemifloxacin, 
gemifloxacin mesylate, and gemifloxacin mesylate sesquihydrate.
    H.R. 2381--A bill to reduce temporarily the duty on PHBA.
    H.R. 2382--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on Butralin.
    H.R. 2394--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on Spirodiclofen.
    H.R. 2395--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on Propamocarb 
HCL (Previcur).
    H.R. 2396--A bill to extend the temporary suspension of duty on 
Imidacloprid pesticides.
    H.R. 2397--A bill to extend the temporary suspension of duty on 
Trifloxystrobin.
    H.R. 2402--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on Desmodur, IL.
    H.R. 2403--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on Chloroacetone.
    H.R. 2404--A bill to reduce temporarily the duty on IPN 
(Isophthalonitrile).
    H.R. 2405--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on NOA 466510 
Technical.
    H.R. 2406--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on Hexythiazox 
Technical.
    H.R. 2424--A bill to extend the temporary suspension of duty on 11-
Aminoundecanoic acid.
    H.R. 2430--A bill to extend the duty reduction on ethylene/
tetrafluoroethylene copolymer (ETFE).
    H.R. 2431--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on 1,10 
Diaminodecane.
    H.R. 2432--A bill to reduce temporarily the duty on Crelan (self-
blocked cycloaliphatic polyuretdione).
    H.R. 2433--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on Aspirin.
    H.R. 2434--A bill to extend the suspension of duty on Baytron C-R.
    H.R. 2435--A bill to extend the suspension of duty on Baytron M.
    H.R. 2436--A bill to temporarily suspend the duty on Baytron and 
Baytron P.
    H.R. 2437--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on Desmodur BL XP 
2468.
    H.R. 2438--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on Hydrazine 
Hydrate.
    H.R. 2439--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on certain flame 
retardant plasticizers.
    H.R. 2440--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on Baypure DS.
    H.R. 2441--A bill to extend the temporary suspension of duty on 
BOPA.
    H.R. 2442--A bill to extend the temporary suspension of duty on 
Thionyl Chloride.
    H.R. 2443--A bill to extend the temporary suspension of duty on 
Ammonium Bifluoride.
    H.R. 2444--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on Bayowet C4.
    H.R. 2445--A bill to extend the temporary suspension of duty on 
PHBA.
    H.R. 2446--A bill to extend the temporary suspension of duty on 
Mondur P.
    H.R. 2447--A bill to extend the temporary suspension of duty on P-
Phenylphenol.
    H.R. 2448--A bill to extend the temporary suspension of duty on 
DEMT.
    H.R. 2449--A bill to extend the temporary suspension of duty on 
Bayowet FT-248.
    H.R. 2450--A bill to extend the temporary suspension of duty on 
PNTOSA.
    H.R. 2451--A bill to extend the temporary suspension of duty on 
Baysilone Fluid.
    H.R. 2452--A bill to reduce temporarily the duty on Desmodur.
    H.R. 2453--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on Desmodur HL.
    H.R. 2454--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on D-Mannose.
    H.R. 2459--A bill to extend the temporary suspension of duty on 
yarn of combed Kashmir (cashmere) and yarn of camel hair.
    H.R. 2460--A bill to extend the temporary suspension of duty on 
certain yarn of carded Kashmir (cashmere).
    H.R. 2461--A bill to extend the temporary suspension of duty on 
certain Kashmir (cashmere) hair.
    H.R. 2462--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on certain camel 
hair.
    H.R. 2463--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on waste of camel 
hair.
    H.R. 2464--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on certain camel 
hair.
    H.R. 2465--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on woven fabric 
containing vicuna hair.
    H.R. 2466--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on certain camel 
hair.
    H.R. 2467--A bill to extend the temporary suspension of duty on 
fine animal hair of Kashmir (cashmere) goats.
    H.R. 2468--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on noils of camel 
hair.
    H.R. 2469--A bill to extend temporarily the duty suspension on 
certain semi-manufactured forms of gold.
    H.R. 2473--A bill to amend the Tariff Act of 1930 relating to 
determining the all-others rate in antidumping cases.
    H.R. 2477--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on certain 
bicycle parts.
    H.R. 2478--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on certain 
bicycle parts.
    H.R. 2479--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on certain 
bicycle parts.
    H.R. 2480--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on certain 
bicycle parts.
    H.R. 2481--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on certain 
bicycle parts.
    H.R. 2482--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on certain 
bicycle parts.
    H.R. 2483--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on certain 
bicycle parts.
    H.R. 2492--A bill to extend the temporary suspension of duty on 
Crotonic Acid.
    H.R. 2493--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on Glyoxylic Acid 
50.
    H.R. 2494--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on Chloroacetic 
acid, ethyl ester.
    H.R. 2495--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on Chloroacetic 
Acid, Sodium Salt.
    H.R. 2496--A bill to extend the temporary suspension of duty on 
3,6,9-Trioxaundecanedioic acid.
    H.R. 2497--A bill to extend the temporary suspension of duty on 
Acetamiprid Technical.
    H.R. 2501--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on 
Cyclopropanecarboxylic acid, 3-(2-chloro-3,3,3-trifluoro-1-propenyl)-
2,2-imethyl-,(2-meth yl(1,1-biphenyl) -3-yl)methyl ester, (z).
    H.R. 2502--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on Phosphonic 
acid (2-chloroethyl) (Ethephon).
    H.R. 2503--A bill to suspend the duty on Iprodione.
    H.R. 2504--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on 2-Cyclohexen-
1-one, and 2-(1-(((3-chloro-2- propenyl)oxy)imino) propyl)-5-(2-
(ethylthio) propyl)-3-hydroxy (Clethodim).
    H.R. 2505--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on Benzoic acid, 
o- and ((3-(4,6-dimethyl-2-pyrimidinyl)-ureido)sulfonyl)-, methylester 
(Sulfometuron methyl).
    H.R. 2506--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on 
Cyclopropanecarboxylic acid, 3-(2,2-Dichlorovinyl)-2,2-dimethyl-, 3-
phenoxybenzyl ester, ( +-)-,(cis,trans).
    H.R. 2507--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on Benzoic acid, 
2-(((((4-methoxy-6-methyl-1,3,5-triazin-2-yl)amino)- 
carbonyl)amino)sulfonyl)-, methyl ester.
    H.R. 2522--A bill to extend the suspension of duty on filter blue 
green photo dye.
    H.R. 2523--A bill to extend the suspension of duty on ammonium 
bifluoride.
    H.R. 2524--A bill to extend the suspension of duty on Bis(4-
fluorophenyl) methanone.
    H.R. 2532--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on urea, polymer 
with formaldehyde (Pergopak).
    H.R. 2535--A bill to extend the suspension of duty on polymethine 
photo-sensitizing dyes.
    H.R. 2536--A bill to extend the suspension of duty on 4-
Hexylresorcinol.
    H.R. 2537--A bill to extend the suspension of duty on certain 
organic pigments and dyes.
    H.R. 2538--A bill to extend the temporary suspension of duty on a 
certain ultraviolet dye.
    H.R. 2539--A bill to extend the temporary suspension of duty on 
certain cathode-ray tubes.
    H.R. 2540--A bill to extend the temporary suspension of duty on 
certain cathode ray tubes.
    H.R. 2542--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on low expansion 
laboratory glass.
    H.R. 2543--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on stoppers, 
lids, and other closures.
    H.R. 2544--A bill to extend the temporary suspension of duty on 
benzoic acid, 2-amino-4-[[(2,5-dichlorophenyl)amino]carbonyl]-, methyl 
ester.
    H.R. 2545--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on Acid Blue 80.
    H.R. 2546--A bill to extend the temporary suspension of duty on 
Pigment Red 185.
    H.R. 2547--A bill to extend the temporary suspension of duty on 
Solvent blue 124.
    H.R. 2548--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on Pigment Brown 
25.
    H.R. 2549--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on Pigment Red 
188.
    H.R. 2550--A bill to extend the temporary suspension of duty on 
Pigment Yellow 154.
    H.R. 2551--A bill to extend the temporary suspension of duty on 
Pigment Yellow 175.
    H.R. 2552--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on Pigment Yellow 
213.
    H.R. 2556--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on air freshener 
electric devices with warmer units.
    H.R. 2557--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on air freshener 
electric devices.
    H.R. 2573--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on cuprammonium 
rayon yarn.
    H.R. 2575--A bill to extend the suspension of duty on Methyl 
thioglycolate (MTG).
    H.R. 2576--A bill to extend the suspension of duty on Ethyl 
pyruvate.
    H.R. 2577--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on Indoxacarb.
    H.R. 2578--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on Dimethyl 
carbonate.
    H.R. 2579--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on 5-Chloro-1-
indanone (EK179).
    H.R. 2580--A bill to extend the suspension of duty on Methyl-4-
trifluoromethoxyphenyl-N-(chlorocarbonyl) carbamate (DPX-KL540).
    H.R. 2581--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on the formulated 
product containing mixtures of the active ingredients 5-methyl-5-(4-
phenoxyphenyl)-3-(phenylamino)-2,4-oxazolidi edione] (famoxadone) and 
2-cyano-N-[(ethylamino)carbonyl]-2-(methoxyimino)acetamide (cymoxanil) 
and application adjuvants.
    H.R. 2582--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on ortho nitro 
aniline.
    H.R. 2583--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on Decanedioic 
acid, Bis(2,2,6,6,-tetramethyl-4-piperidinyl).
    H.R. 2584--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on Benzoxazole, 
2,2-(2,5-thiophenediyl)bis(5-(1,1-dimethylethyl).
    H.R. 2585--A bill to extend the suspension of duty on 2methyl-4,6-
bis[(octylthio)methyl]phenol.
    H.R. 2586--A bill to extend the suspension of duty on 4-[[4,6-
bis(octylthio)-1,3,5-traizine-2-yl]amino]-2,6-bis(1,1-
dimethylethyl)phenol.
    H.R. 2589--A bill to extend the temporary suspension of duty on 
certain filament yarns.
    H.R. 2590--A bill to extend the temporary suspension of duty on 
certain filament yarns.
    H.R. 2591--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on certain yarn 
(other than sewing thread) of synthetic staple fibers, not put up for 
retail sale.
    H.R. 2596--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on modified steel 
leaf spring leaves.
    H.R. 2597--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on suspension 
system stabilizer bars.
    H.R. 2598--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on steel leaf 
spring leaves.
    H.R. 2602--A bill to reduce temporarily the duty on Formulations of 
Azoxystrobin.
    H.R. 2603--A bill to reduce temporarily the duty on Cypermethrin 
Technical.
    H.R. 2604--A bill to reduce temporarily the duty on Formulations of 
Pinoxaden/Cloquintocet-Mexyl.
    H.R. 2605--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on Formulations 
of Difenoconazole/Mefenoxam.
    H.R. 2606--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on Fludioxonil 
Technical.
    H.R. 2607--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on Formulations 
of Clodinafop-propargyl.
    H.R. 2608--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on Emamectin 
Benzoate Technical.
    H.R. 2609--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on Cloquintocet 
Technical.
    H.R. 2610--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on Mefenoxam 
Technical.
    H.R. 2611--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on Cyproconazole 
Technical.
    H.R. 2612--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on Pinoxaden 
Technical.
    H.R. 2613--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on Formulations 
of Tralkoxydim.
    H.R. 2614--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on Propiconazole 
Technical - Bulk.
    H.R. 2615--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on Permethrin 
Technical.
    H.R. 2624--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on certain items 
and to reduce temporarily the duty on certain items.
    H.R. 2632--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on 3,3'-
Dichlorobenzidine Dihydrochloride.
    H.R. 2675--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on TMC114.
    H.R. 2676--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on certain 
chemicals and chemical mixtures.
    H.R. 2677--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on certain 
chemicals.
    H.R. 2678--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on mixtures of 
(1A1B1A)-(cis and trans)-1-(2-(2,4-Dichlorophenyl)- 4-propyl-1,3-
dioxalan-2-yl)methyl)-1H-1,2,4-triazole (Propiconazole) and application 
adjuvants.
    H.R. 2696--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on 9,10-
Anthracenedione, 1,8-dihydroxy-4-nitro-5-(phenylamino).
    H.R. 2697--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on Chromate(2-), 
[2,4-dihydro-4-[[2-(hydroxy-kO)-4-nitrophenyl]azo-kN1]-5-met hyl-3H-
pyrazol-3-onato(2-)-kO3][3-[[4,5-dihydro-3-methyl-1-( 4-methylphenyl)-
5-(oxo-kO)-1H-pyrazol-4-yl]azo-kN1]-4-(hydro xy-kO)-5-
nitrobenzenesulfonato(3-)]-, disodium.
    H.R. 2698--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on 9,10-
Anthracenedione, 1,8-bis(phenylthio).
    H.R. 2699--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on 2,7-
Naphthalenedisulfonic acid, 4-amino-3,6-bis[[5-[[4-chloro-6-[methyl[2-
(meth ylamino)-2-oxoethyl]amino]-1,3,5-tria zin-2-yl]amino]-2-
sulfophenyl]azo]-5 -hydroxy-, lithium potassium sodium salt.
    H.R. 2700--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on 2-
Naphthalenesulfonic acid, 7-[(5-chloro-2,6-difluoro-4-
pyrimidinyl)amino]-4-hydroxy-3-[(4-methoxy-2-sulfophenyl)azo]-, sodium 
salt.
    H.R. 2701--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on 2,7-
Naphthalenedisulfonic acid, 4-amino-5-hydroxy-6-[[2-methoxy-5-[[2-
(sulfo oxy)ethyl]sulfonyl]phenyl]azo]-3-[[4-[[2-
(sulfooxy)ethyl]sulfonyl]phenyl]azo -, tetrasodium salt.
    H.R. 2702--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on 2,7-
Naphthalenedisulfonic acid, 4-amino-5-hydroxy-3,6-bis[[4-[[2-
(sulfooxy)ethyl]sulfonyl]phenyl]azo]-, tetra sodium salt.
    H.R. 2703--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on [2,2'-Bi-1H-
indole]-3,3 -diol-, potassium sodium salt.
    H.R. 2704--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on 3-
Pyridinecarbonitrile, 5-[(2-cyano-4-nitrophenyl)azo]-2-[[2-(2-
hydroxyethoxy)ethyl] amino]-4-methyl-6-(phenylamino).
    H.R. 2705--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on Acetic acid, 
cyano[3-[(6-methoxy-2-benzothiazolyl)amino]-1H-isoindol-1-yl idene]-, 
pentyl ester.
    H.R. 2706--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on 
Benzenesulfonic acid, [(9,10-dihydro-9,10-dioxo-1,4-
anthracenediyl)bis[imino[3-(2- methylpropyl)-3,1-propanediyl]]]bis-, 
disodium salt.
    H.R. 2707--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on Acetic acid, 
[4-(2,6-dihydro-2,6-dioxo-7-phenylbenzo[1,2-b:4,5-b']difuran -3-
yl)phenoxy]-, 2-ethoxyethyl ester.
    H.R. 2708--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on Benzo[1,2-
b:4,5-b ]difuran-2,6-dione, 3-phenyl-7-(4-propoxyphenyl).
    H.R. 2709--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on Ethanesulfonic 
acid, 2-[[[2,5-dichloro-4-[(2-methyl-1H-indol-3-
yl)azo]phenyl]sulfonyl]amino]-, monoso dium salt.
    H.R. 2710--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on 2,7-
Naphthalenedisulfonic acid, 5-[[4-chloro-6-[(3-sulfophenyl)amino]-
1,3,5-triazin-2-yl]amino] -4-hydroxy-3- [[4-[[2-
(sulfooxy)ethyl]sulfonyl]phenyl]azo],sodium salt.
    H.R. 2711--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on 1,3,6-
Naphthalenetrisulfonic acid, 7-[[2-[(aminocarbonyl)amino]-4-[[4-[4-[2-
[[4-[[3-[(aminocarb onyl)amino]-4-[(3,6,8-trisulfo-2-
naphthalenyl)azo]phenyl]amio] -6-chloro-1,3,5-triazin-2-
yl]amino]ethyl]-1-piperazinyl]- - chloro-1,3,5-triazin-2-
yl]amino]phenyl]azo]-, lithium potassium sodium salt).
    H.R. 2712--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on 9,10-
Anthracenedione, 1,8-dihydroxy-4-nitro-5-(phenylamino).
    H.R. 2713--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on 2-
Anthracenesulfonic acid, 4-[[3-(acetylamino)phenyl]amino]-1-amino-9,10-
dihydro-9,10-d ioxo-, monosodium salt.
    H.R. 2714--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on Acetic acid, 
[4-[2,6-dihydro-2,6-dioxo-7-(4-propoxyphenyl)benzo[1,2-b:4,5 -b 
]difuran-3-yl]phenoxy]-, 2-ethoxyethyl ester.
    H.R. 2764--A bill to extend the temporary suspension of duty on 2 
methyl 5 nitrobenzenesulfonic acid.
    H.R. 2765--A bill to extend the temporary suspension of duty on p-
cresidine sulfonic acid.
    H.R. 2766--A bill to extend the temporary suspension of duty on 2,4 
disulfo benzaldehyde.
    H.R. 2767--A bill to extend the temporary suspension of duty on n 
ethyl N (3-sulfobenzyl) aniline.
    H.R. 2768--A bill to extend the temporary suspension of duty on m-
hydroxy benzaldehyde.
    H.R. 2769--A bill to extend the temporary suspension of duty on 2 
amino 5 sulfobenzoic acid.
    H.R. 2770--A bill to extend the temporary suspension of duty on 2 
amino 6 nitro phenol 4 sulfonic acid.
    H.R. 2771--A bill to extend the temporary suspension of duty on 2,5 
bis [(1,3 dioxobutyl) amino] benzene sulfonic acid.
    H.R. 2772--A bill to extend the temporary suspension of duty on 4 
[(4 amino phenyl) azo] benzene sulfonic acid, monosodium salt.
    H.R. 2773--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on oleoresin 
turmeric.
    H.R. 2774--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on basic yellow 
40 chloride based.
    H.R. 2775--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on direct yellow 
119.
    H.R. 2776--A bill to extend the temporary suspension of duty on 4 
[(4 amino phenyl) azo] benzene sulfonic acid.
    H.R. 2777--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on oleoresin 
paprika.
    H.R. 2781--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on Naugard 412S.
    H.R. 2782--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on 
Triacetonamine.
    H.R. 2783--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on Ipconazole.
    H.R. 2784--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on Omite Tech.
    H.R. 2785--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on Pantera 
Technical.
    H.R. 2806--A bill to reduce temporarily the duty on Paraquat 
Dichloride.
    H.R. 2809--A bill to temporarily suspend the duty on Carfentrazone.
    H.R. 2810--A bill to extend the temporary suspension of duty on 3-
(Ethylsulfonly)-2-pyridinesulfonamide.
    H.R. 2816--A bill to provide duty-free treatment for certain tuna.
    H.R. 2817--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on certain 
basketballs.
    H.R. 2818--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on certain 
leather basketballs.
    H.R. 2819--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on certain rubber 
basketballs.
    H.R. 2820--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on certain 
volleyballs.
    H.R. 2821--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on certain 
synthetic basketballs.
    H.R. 2825--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on 4-Chloro-3-
[[3-(4-methoxyphenyl)-1,3-dioxopropyl-]amino]-do decyl ester.
    H.R. 2833--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on NaMBT.
    H.R. 2836--A bill to extend the duty suspension on Allyl 
isosulfocynate.
    H.R. 2837--A bill to extend the duty suspension on sodium methylate 
powder.
    H.R. 2838--A bill to extend the duty suspension on Trimethyl cyclo 
hexanol.
    H.R 2839--A bill to extend the duty suspension on 2,2-Dimethyl-3-
(3-methylphenyl)proponal.
    H.R. 2845--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on certain plain 
woven fabrics.
    H.R. 2847--A bill to extend the suspension of duty on 1,3-
Benzenedicarboxamide, N, N-Bis (2,2,6,6-tetramethyl-4-piperidinyl)-.
    H.R. 2848--A bill to extend the suspension of duty on reaction 
products of phosphorus trichloride with 1,1-biphenyl and 2,4-bis(1,1-
dimethylethyl)phenol.
    H.R. 2849--A bill to extend the suspension of duty on preparations 
based on ethanediamide, N-(2-ethoxyphenyl)-N-(4-isodecylphenyl)-.
    H.R. 2850--A bill to extend the suspension of duty on 1-Acetyl-4-
(3-dodecyl-2,5-dioxo-1-pyrrolidinyl)-2,2,6,6-tetramethylpiperidine.
    H.R. 2851--A bill to extend the suspension of duty on 3-Dodecyl-1-
(2,2,6,6-tetramethyl-4-piperidinyl)-2,5-pyrrolid nedione.
    H.R. 2852--A bill to extend the suspension of duty on 
Tetraacetylethylenediamine.
    H.R. 2853--A bill to extend the suspension of duty on sodium 
petroleum sulfonate.
    H.R. 2854--A bill to extend the suspension of duty on esters and 
sodium esters of parahydroxybenzoic acid.
    H.R. 2855--A bill to extend the suspension of duty on Oxalic 
Anilide.
    H.R. 2856--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on certain 
inflatable balls.
    H.R. 2879--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on P Tolulene 
Sulfonyl Chloride.
    H.R. 2880--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on 3,3 
Dichlorobenzidine Dihydrochloride.
    H.R. 2881--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on p-Amino 
Benzamide.
    H.R. 2882--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on p-Cloro 
Aniline.
    H.R. 2883--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on p-Chloro-o-
Nitro Aniline.
    H.R. 2884--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on 3 Chloro-4-
Methylanine.
    H.R. 2885--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on Acetoacet-o-
Chloro Anilide.
    H.R. 2886--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on Acetoacet-p-
Anisidine.
    H.R. 2887--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on Alpha Oxy 
Naphthoic Acid.
    H.R. 2888--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on Pigment Green 
7 Crude, not ready for use as a pigment.
    H.R. 2889--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on 1,3 Diamino 
Isoindoline.
    H.R. 2890--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on 1,8 
Naphthalamide.
    H.R. 2896--A bill to remove the 100 percent tariff imposed on 
roasted chicory and other roasted coffee substitutes.
    H.R. 2906--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on linuron.
    H.R. 2907--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on N,N-
dimethylpiperidinium chloride.
    H.R. 2908--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on diuron.
    H.R. 2909--A bill to reduce temporarily the duty on formulated 
product KROVAR IDF.
    H.R. 2913--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on Thiamethoxam 
Technical.
    H.R. 2914--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on Triasulfuron 
Technical.
    H.R. 2915--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on Brodifacoum 
Technical.
    H.R. 2916--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on Pymetrozine 
Technical.
    H.R. 2917--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on formulations 
of Thiamethoxam, Difenoconazole, Fludioxinil, and Mefenoxam.
    H.R. 2918--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on 
Trifloxysulfuron-Sodium Technical.
    H.R. 2919--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on diisopropyl 
succinate.
    H.R. 2920--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on 2,4-di-tert-
butyl-6-(5-chlorobenzotriazol-2-yl)phenol.
    H.R. 2921--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on a mixture of 
Butanedioic acid, dimethylester, polymer with 4-hydroxy-2,2,6,6-
tetramethyl-1-piperidine ethanol and 1,3,5-Triazine-2,4,6-
triamine,N,N'''-[1,2-ethane-diyl-bis [ [ [4,6-bis-[butyl (1,2,2,6,6-
pentamethyl-4-piperidinyl)amino]-1,3,5-triazine-2 yl] imino]-3,1-
propanediyl] ] bis[N',N''- dibutyl-N',N''-bis(1,2,2,6,6-pentamethyl-4-
piperidinyl)-.
    H.R. 2922--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on 4-chloro-
benzonitrile.
    H.R. 2954--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on manganese 
metal flake containing at least 99.5 percent by weight of manganese.
    H.R. 2972--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on 2-
Naphthalenesulfonic acid, 6-[(2,4-diaminophenyl)azo]-3-[[4-[[4-[[7-
[(2,4-diaminophenyl azo]-1-hydroxy-3-sulfo-2-
naphthalenyl]azo]phenyl]amino]-3- sulfophenyl]azo]-4-hydroxy-, 
trisodium salt.
    H.R. 2973--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on Methylene Bis-
Benzotriazolyl Tetramethylbutylphenol.
    H.R. 2974--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on Bis-
Ethylhexyloxyphenol Methoxyphenol Triazine.
    H.R. 2975--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on 
Benzenesulfonic acid, 2,2-[(1-methyl-1,2-ethanediyl)bis[imino(6-fluoro-
1,3,5-tria ine-4,2-diyl)imino[2-[(aminocarbonyl)amino]-4,1-phenylene]az 
]]bis[5-[(4-sulfophenyl)azo]-, sodium salt.
    H.R. 2976--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on Chromate(2-), 
[3-(hydroxy-.kappa.O)-4-[[2-(hydroxy-.kappa.O)-1-naphthale 
yl]azo-.kappa.N2]-1-naphthalenesulfonato(3-)][1-[[2-(hydroxy kappa.O)-
5-[4-methoxyphenyl)azo]phenyl]azo-.kappa.N2]-2-nap hthalenolato(2-
)-.kappa.O]-, disodium.
    H.R. 2996--A bill to provide for the liquidation or reliquidation 
of certain drawback claims.
    H.R. 2997--A bill to provide for the liquidation or reliquidation 
of certain drawback claims.
    H.R. 2998--A bill to provide for the liquidation or reliquidation 
of certain drawback claims.
    H.R. 2999--A bill to provide for the liquidation or reliquidation 
of certain drawback claims.
    H.R. 3001--A bill to provide for the liquidation or reliquidation 
of certain drawback claims.
    H.R. 3002--A bill to provide for the liquidation or reliquidation 
of certain drawback claims.
    H.R. 3015--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on 2 benzylthio-
3-ethyl sulfonyl pyridine.
    H.R. 3016--A bill to extend the temporary suspension of duty on 
carbamic acid.
    H.R. 3023--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on 2-amino-4-
methoxy-6-methyl-1,3,5-triazine.
    H.R. 3024--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on formulated 
products containing mixtures of the active ingredient 2-chloro-N-[[(4-
methoxy-6-methyl-1,3,5-triazin-2yl) amino]carbonyl] benzenesulfonamide 
and application adjuvants.
    H.R. 3025--A bill to extend the suspension of duty on 
Esfenvalerate.
    H.R. 3026--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on 2-methyl-4-
methoxy-6-methylamino-1,3,5-triazine.
    H.R. 3027--A bill to reduce temporarily the duty on mixtures of 
sodium-2-chloro-6-[(4,6 dimethoxypyrimidin-2-yl)thio]benzoate and 
application adjuvants (pyrithiobac-sodium).
    H.R. 3028--A bill to extend the suspension of duty on Methyl 2-
[[[[[4-(dimethylamino)-6-(2,2,2-trifluoroethoxy)-1,3,5-tri zin-2-yl]-
amino]carbonyl]amino]sulfonyl]-3-methylbenzoate and application 
adjuvants.
    H.R. 3029--A bill to extend the suspension of duty on Benzyl 
carbazate.
    H.R. 3030--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on mixtures of N-
[[(4,6-dimethoxypyrimidin-2-yl)amino]carbonyl]-3-(ethylsul onyl)-2-
pyridinesulfonamide and application adjuvants.
    H.R. 3033--A bill to extend the temporary reduction in duty on 
certain educational devices.
    H.R. 3066--A bill to amend the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the 
United States to provide separate tariff categories for certain tractor 
body parts.
    H.R. 3067--A bill to amend the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the 
United States to provide a new subheading for certain log forwarders 
used as motor vehicles for the transport of goods for duty-free 
treatment consistent with other agricultural use log handling 
equipment.
    H.R. 3089--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on 1,3-bis(4-
Aminophenoxy)benzene (RODA).
    H.R. 3090--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on Pyromellitic 
Dianhydride (PMDA).
    H.R. 3091--A bill to extend temporarily the duty suspension on 
4,4'-Oxydiphthalic Anhydride (ODPA).
    H.R. 3092--A bill to reduce temporarily the duty on 4,4'-
Oxydianiline (ODA).
    H.R. 3093--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on 3,3',4,4'-
Biphenyltetracarboxylic Dianhydride (BPDA).
    H.R. 3105--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on certain aramid 
chopped fiber.
    H.R. 3106--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on fabric woven 
with certain continuous filament wholly nylon type-66 textured yarns.
    H.R. 3112--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on certain 
decorative plates, decorative sculptures, decorative plaques, and 
architectural miniatures.
    H.R. 3113--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on certain cups, 
with or without saucers, of porcelain or china.
    H.R. 3114--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on certain flags.
    H.R. 3115--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on certain 
clocks.
    H.R. 3116--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on certain glass 
articles.
    H.R. 3117--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on certain glass 
articles of lead crystal.
    H.R. 3118--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on certain music 
boxes.
    H.R. 3119--A bill to extend the temporary suspension of duty on 
carfentazone ethyl.
    H.R. 3120--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on certain cores 
used in remanufacture.
    H.R. 3126--A bill to provide for the liquidation or reliquidation 
of certain entries.
    H.R. 3210--A bill to extend the temporary suspension of duty on 3-
Amino-5-mercapto-1,2,4-triazole.
    H.R. 3211--A bill to extend the temporary suspension of duty on 
748+-bromo-748+-nitrostyrene.
    H.R. 3212--A bill to the temporary suspension of duty on asulam 
sodium salt.
    H.R. 3213--A bill to extend the temporary suspension of duty on 
diiodomethyl-p-tolylsulfone.
    H.R. 3214--A bill to extend the temporary suspension of duty on 2-
Propenoic acid, polymer with diethenylbenzene.
    H.R. 3215--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on ADTP.
    H.R. 3216--A bill to extend the temporary suspension of duty on 
Benfluralin.
    H.R. 3217--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on DCBTF.
    H.R. 3218--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on Noviflumuron.
    H.R. 3219--A bill to reduce temporarily the duty on Cyhalofop.
    H.R. 3220--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on 
parachlorobenzotrifluoride.
    H.R. 3221--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on mixtures of 
insecticide.
    H.R. 3222--A bill to extend the temporary suspension of duty on 
2,6-Dichloro aniline.
    H.R. 3223--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on a certain 
mixture of fungicide.
    H.R. 3224--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on 1,2-
Benzisothiazol-3(2H)-one (9CI).
    H.R. 3225--A bill to extend the temporary suspension of duty on 3, 
4-Dichlorobenzonitrile.
    H.R. 3226--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on Styrene, ar-
ethyl-, polymer with divinylbenzene and styrene (6CI) beads with low 
ash.
    H.R. 3227--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on 1,2-
Benzisothiazol-3(2H)-one (9CI).
    H.R. 3228--A bill to extend the temporary suspension of duty on 
DEPCT.
    H.R. 3229--A bill to reduce temporarily the duty on trifluralin.
    H.R. 3230--A bill to extend the temporary suspension of duty on 
1,2-Benzenedicarboxaldehyde.
    H.R. 3231--A bill to extend the temporary suspension of duty on 
DMDS.
    H.R. 3232--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on mixtures of 
fungicide.
    H.R. 3233--A bill to extend the suspension of duty on trifluralin.
    H.R. 3234--A bill to extend the temporary suspension of duty on 
1,3-Dimethyl-2-imidazolidinone.
    H.R. 3235--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on 2-Methyl-4-
chlorophenoxyacetic acid.
    H.R. 3236--A bill to reduce temporarily the duty on certain 
mixtures of florasulam.
    H.R. 3237--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on 2-Methyl-4-
chlorophenoxy-acetic acid, di-methylamine salt.
    H.R. 3238--A bill to extend the temporary suspension of duty on 
isoxaben.
    H.R. 3239--A bill to extend the temporary suspension of duty on 
halofenozide.
    H.R. 3240--A bill to extend the temporary suspension of duty on 
methoxyfenozide.
    H.R. 3241--A bill to reduce temporarily the duty on myclobutanil.
    H.R. 3242--A bill to extend the temporary suspension of duty on 
propanil.
    H.R. 3243--A bill to extend the temporary suspension of duty on 
propiconazole.
    H.R. 3244--A bill to extend the temporary suspension of duty on 
quinoline.
    H.R. 3245--A bill to reduce temporarily the duty on fluoroxypyr.
    H.R. 3246--A bill to extend the temporary suspension of duty on 
tebufenozide.
    H.R. 3247--A bill to extend the temporary suspension of duty on 
mixed isomers of 1,3-dichloropropene.
    H.R. 3257--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on biaxially 
oriented polypropylene dielectric film.
    H.R. 3258--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on biaxially 
oriented polyethylene terephthalate dielectric film.
    H.R. 3285--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on charge control 
agent 7.
    H.R. 3286--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on pro-jet black 
820 liquid feed.
    H.R. 3287--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on pro-jet cyan 1 
RO feed and pro-jet cyan OF 1 RO feed.
    H.R. 3288--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on pro-jet 
magenta M700.
    H.R. 3289--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on pro-jet jellow 
1G Stage.
    H.R. 3290--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on pro-jet fast 
black 287 NA liquid feed.
    H.R. 3291--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on pro-jet fast 
black 286 stage.
    H.R. 3292--A bill to extend the duty suspension on pro-jet black 
263 stage.
    H.R. 3293--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on pro-jet cyan 
485 stage.
    H.R. 3294--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on pro-jet black 
661 liquid feed.
    H.R. 3295--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on pro-jet cyan 
854 liquid feed.
    H.R. 3303--A bill to suspend temporarily the deposit requirements 
and assessments of countervailing duties and antidumping duties on 
imports of CHQ wire rod covered by certain countervailing and 
antidumping duty orders.
    H.R. 3308--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on erasers.
    H.R. 3309--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on nail clippers.
    H.R. 3310--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on artificial 
flowers.
    H.R. 3311--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on electrically 
operated pencil sharpeners.
    H.R. 3340--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on Phenmedipham.
    H.R. 3341--A bill to suspend tempoarily the duty on Desmedipham.
    H.R. 3342--A bill to extend the temporary suspension of duty on 
ethofumesate.
    H.R. 3343--A bill to extend the temporary suspension of duty on 
Nemacur VL.
    H.R. 3346--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on 2 benzylthio-
3-ethyl sulfonyl pyridine.
    H.R. 3353--A bill to provide for the liquidation or reliquidation 
of certain drawback claims relating to petroleum products.
    H.R. 3354--A bill to provide for the liquidation or reliquidation 
of certain drawback claims relating to petroleum products.
    H.R. 3355--A bill to provide for the liquidation or reliquidation 
of certain drawback claims relating to petroleum products.
    H.R. 3356--A bill to provide for the liquidation or reliquidation 
of certain drawback claims relating to petroleum products.
    H.R. 3357--A bill to provide for the liquidation or reliquidation 
of certain drawback claims relating to petroleum products.
    H.R. 3363--A bill to amend the Tariff Act of 1930 relating to 
drawback.
    H.R. 3371--A bill to provide for the liquidation or reliquidation 
of certain entries.
    H.R. 3386--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on certain 
footwear with open toes or heels.
    H.R. 3387--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on certain work 
footwear.
    H.R. 3388--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on certain 
women's footwear.
    H.R. 3389--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on certain 
footwear for girls.
    H.R. 3390--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on certain 
protective footwear.
    H.R. 3391--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on certain 
athletic footwear.
    H.R. 3392--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on certain 
footwear with open toes or heels.
    H.R. 3393--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on certain work 
footwear.
    H.R. 3394--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on certain work 
footwear.
    H.R. 3395--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on certain work 
footwear.
    H.R. 3414--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on certain 
refracting and reflecting telescopes.
    H.R. 3415--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on mixture of 
magnesium peroxide and magnesium oxide containing 35 percent magnesium 
peroxide.
    H.R. 3416--A bill to prohibit the application of the foreign 
affairs exemption to the rule making requirements under the 
Administrative Procedure Act with respect to actions of the Committee 
for the Implementation of Textile Agreements. Note: All Committee 
advisories and news releases are available on the World Wide Web 
athttp://waysandmeans.house.gov.

ADVISORY

FROM THE 
COMMITTEE
 ON WAYS 
AND 
MEANS

                         SUBCOMMITTEE ON TRADE

                                                CONTACT: (202) 225-6649
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
August 05, 2005
No. TR-3 Revised

                   Shaw Announces Additional Bills on

                Technical Corrections to U.S. Trade Laws

                and Miscellaneous Duty Suspension Bills

    Congressman E. Clay Shaw, Jr. (R-FL), Chairman, Subcommittee on 
Trade of the Committee on Ways and Means, today announced the addition 
of the following bills to the July 25 request for written comments on 
technical corrections to U.S. trade laws and miscellaneous duty 
suspension bills.
      

DETAILS FOR SUBMISSION OF WRITTEN COMMENTS:

      
    Please Note: Any person(s) and/or organization(s) wishing to submit 
for the record must follow the appropriate link on the hearing page of 
the Committee website and complete the informational forms. From the 
Committee homepage, http://waysandmeans.house.gov, select ``109th 
Congress'' from the menu entitled, ``Hearing Archives'' (http://
waysandmeans.house.gov/Hearings.asp?congress=17). Select the request 
for written comments for which you would like to submit, and click on 
the link entitled, ``Click here to provide a submission for the 
record.'' Once you have followed the online instructions, completing 
all informational forms and clicking ``submit'' on the final page, an 
email will be sent to the address which you supply confirming your 
interest in providing a submission for the record. You MUST REPLY to 
the email and ATTACH your submission as a Word or WordPerfect document, 
in compliance with the formatting requirements listed below, by close 
of business Friday, September 2, 2005. inally, please note that due to 
the change in House mail policy, the U.S. Capitol Police will refuse 
sealed-package deliveries to all House Office Buildings. For questions, 
or if you encounter technical problems, please call (202) 225-1721.
      

FORMATTING REQUIREMENTS:

      
    The Committee relies on electronic submissions for printing the 
official hearing record. As always, submissions will be included in the 
record according to the discretion of the Committee. The Committee will 
not alter the content of your submission, but we reserve the right to 
format it according to our guidelines. Any submission provided to the 
Committee by a witness, any supplementary materials submitted for the 
printed record, and any written comments in response to a request for 
written comments must conform to the guidelines listed below. Any 
submission or supplementary item not in compliance with these 
guidelines will not be printed, but will be maintained in the Committee 
files for review and use by the Committee.
      
    1. All submissions and supplementary materials must be provided in 
Word or WordPerfect format and MUST NOT exceed a total of 10 pages, 
including attachments. Witnesses and submitters are advised that the 
Committee relies on electronic submissions for printing the official 
hearing record.
      
    2. Copies of whole documents submitted as exhibit material will not 
be accepted for printing. Instead, exhibit material should be 
referenced and quoted or paraphrased. All exhibit material not meeting 
these specifications will be maintained in the Committee files for 
review and use by the Committee.
      
    3. All submissions must include a list of all clients, persons, 
and/or organizations on whose behalf the witness appears. A 
supplemental sheet must accompany each submission listing the name, 
company, address, telephone and fax numbers of each witness.
      

SUMMARY OF BILLS:

      
    H.R. 915--A bill to authorize the President to take certain actions 
to protect archaeological or ethnological materials of Afghanistan.
    H.R. 3176--A bill to amend the Caribbean Basin Economic Recovery 
Act to provide preferential treatment for certain apparel articles that 
are both cut (or knit to shape) and sewn or otherwise assembled in one 
or more beneficiary countries under that Act from fabrics or yarn not 
widely available in commercial quantities.
    H.R 3483--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on certain 
footwear.
    H.R. 3484--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on certain 
athletic footwear.
    H.R. 3485--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on certain work 
footwear.
    H.R. 3486--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on certain 
footwear for men.
    H.R. 3487--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on certain rubber 
or plastic footwear.
    H.R. 3488--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on certain work 
footwear.
    H.R. 3489--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on certain 
athletic footwear.
    H.R. 3490--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on certain rubber 
or plastic footwear.
    H.R. 3491--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on certain 
leather footwear.
    H.R. 3527--A bill to extend the temporary suspension of duty on 
Ethalfluralin.
    H.R. 3528--A bill to extend the temporary suspension of duty on 
Diphenyl sulfide.
    H.R. 3529--A bill to extend the temporary suspension of duty on 
4,4-Dimethoxy-2-butanone.
    H.R. 3530--A bill to extend the temporary suspension of duty on 
Methacrylamide.
    H.R. 3531--A bill to extend the temporary suspension of duty on 
Fenbuconazole.
    H.R. 3609--A bill to extend the temporary suspension of duty on 
thiophanate methyl and application adjuvants.
    H.R. 3610--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on zinc 
dimethyldithiocarbamate.
    H.R. 3611--A bill to extend the temporary suspension of duty on 
thiophanate methyl.
    H.R. 3635--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on certain 
sardines in oil, in airtight containers, neither skinned nor boned.
    H.R. 3636--A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on prepared or 
preserved oysters, not smoked.
      
    Note: All Committee advisories and news releases are available on 
the World Wide Web at http://waysandmeans.house.gov.
                                         Buckman Laboratories, Inc.
                                           Memphis, Tennessee 38108
                                                    August 30, 2005
House Ways and Means Committee
Subcommittee on Trade
United States Congress
Washington, DC

    It has been brought to our attention that 109th Congress H.R. 178 
would suspend until 2014 the import duty on dichloroethyl ether 
(``DCEE''). Buckman Laboratories, Inc. (``Buckman''), the principal 
U.S. manufacturer of DCEE, opposes eliminating the import duties 
currently imposed on that product.
    Buckman is a privately held international specialty chemicals 
manufacturer headquartered in Memphis, Tennessee. Founded in 1945, 
today Buckman is a leading manufacturer of specialty chemicals for 
aqueous industrial systems. The company works with industries worldwide 
to provide advanced chemical treatment technologies and extensive 
technical service to solve complex industrial problems. Buckman 
produces over 500 different products and employs over 1,300 people in 
over 70 countries.
    Buckman produces DCEE principally for further manufacturing use as 
a component of water treatment products. DCEE is one of the two raw 
materials used to make a water treatment product called WSCP, a 
microbicide that controls algae growth in swimming pools or in cooling 
towers. Buckman also uses DCEE as a manufacturing component of other 
Buckman recreational and industrial water treatment products, 
domestically and internationally, and sells DCEE directly both as a 
stand-alone solvent product and as an intermediate for other reactive 
products to the oilfield drilling and equipment business. Other known 
international DCEE producers include Maruzen, a Japanese company. 
Maruzen manufactures DCEE in Japan utilizing a different, potentially 
more volatile acyclic ether manufacturing process, and exports it to 
the U.S. as a solvent, principally to the U.S. oilfield business 
through U.S. distributors. Importers have paid a duty on DCEE produced 
overseas for many years, as confirmed by the U.S. Court of Appeals for 
the Federal Circuit on May 12, 2004 (E.T. Horn v. U.S., case #03-1363).
    Having lost an attempt to reduce the import duty to 1% from 5.6%, 
the proponents of H.R. 178 (introduced last January at the peak of the 
most recent increase in oil prices) simply desire greater profits by 
eliminating the import duty altogether. There is no evidence 
eliminating the import tariff on DCEE will rectify a product shortage 
(as none exists), lower wholesale DCEE prices to U.S. firms, or lower 
retail prices for refined petroleum products or water treatment 
products. To the contrary, H.R. 178 likely will increase profits and 
purchases of DCEE from non-U.S. manufacturers, increase incentives to 
locate or relocate DCEE plants overseas, decrease domestic profits for 
U.S. manufacturers, and reduce U.S. plant production levels with 
related effects on needs for domestic skilled labor.
    Buckman manufactures more than five million pounds annually of DCEE 
at its Cadet, Missouri, plant. DCEE has been one of our company's most 
important products for more than thirty years. Buckman has invested 
more than $27 million in our Cadet manufacturing facilities to date. 
Over thirty full-time employees work at Cadet's highly efficient, very 
competitive plant. Importantly, the Cadet facility has sufficient 
capacity to produce up to 12.5 million pounds of DCEE annually for 
domestic and international markets if demand materializes.
    Buckman prefers to be able to continue (and increase) domestic 
production of DCEE. We submit that the proponents can make no 
compelling case for eliminating the import tariff on DCEE at this time 
since virtually all domestic and a majority of international demand may 
be met by current U.S. production facilities, and since international 
manufacturers compete vigorously to stabilize wholesale prices.
    Buckman would be delighted to show any member of Congress or its 
staff our state-of-the-art manufacturing facilities and illustrate the 
issues raised by H.R. 178. Please contact Rocky Stevens (573-438-8101) 
or Chuck Brandenburg (901-272-8339) to arrange a tour.
    Please contact us immediately should further questions arise.
            Sincerely,
                                             Charles D. Brandenburg
                                                          President

                                                 William C. Pitcher
                              Vice President-Legal, General Counsel

                                 <F-dash>

         Statement of Erik O. Autor, National Retail Federation
    The National Retail Federation (NRF) submits this statement to the 
Ways and Means Trade Subcommittee to express the U.S. retail industry's 
strong opposition H.R. 445, which is under consideration for inclusion 
in a miscellaneous trade bill. NRF is the world's largest retail trade 
association with membership that comprises all retail formats and 
channels of distribution including department, specialty, discount, 
catalog, Internet and independent stores as well as the industry's key 
trading partners of retail goods and services. NRF represents an 
industry with more than 1.5 million U.S. retail establishments, more 
than 23 million employees--about one in five American workers--and 2004 
sales of $4.1 trillion. As the industry umbrella group, NRF also 
represents more than 100 state, national and international retail 
associations.
    H.R. 445--A bill to amend section 304 of the Tariff Act of 1930 
with respect to the marking of imported home furniture
    Finally, NRF opposes H.R. 445, regardless of how it is packaged (as 
stand-alone legislation or as part of another piece of legislation). 
The measure is unworkable and unnecessary. It is unworkable because not 
all furniture can bear a sign that is at least 70 square centimeters in 
size that would not significantly detract from the appearance of the 
furniture (e.g., wall mirrors).
    It is unnecessary because U.S. law and regulation already require 
that a country of origin designation be placed on a product in such a 
way that the final consumer can readily ascertain its origin. Currently 
labels are typically placed at the back of a piece of furniture or 
inside it (for example, within a dresser drawer) to provide the 
information to the consumer without marring its appearance and 
diminishing its value.
    Retail companies' long experience with customer relations has 
consistently shown that the vast majority of consumers do not care 
about the country of origin of the products they buy, at least to the 
extent that they demand the information be placed in a more conspicuous 
location. Those who are concerned can readily ascertain the origin 
under current rules. Therefore, as a practical matter, legislation such 
as H.R. 445 is not designed to inform customers more fully, but rather 
to act as a non-tariff trade barrier. As such, it would be actionable 
through the dispute settlement procedures at the WTO as being in 
violation of U.S. obligations under the rules of international trade.
    NRF appreciates the opportunity to offer these comments H.R. 445. 
We strongly oppose and urge the exclusion of H.R. 445 from any 
miscellaneous trade legislation.

                                 <F-dash>

                    [By permission of the Chairman.]

                                                    Dairy Australia
                                                Victoria, Australia
                                                  September 2, 2005
Congressman E. Clay Shaw Jr
Chairman
Subcommittee on Trade
U.S. House of Representatives

Dear Congressman Shaw

    On July 25 you invited public comments on bills proposed for 
inclusion in a package of miscellaneous tariff measures. These 
comments, in opposition to the inclusion of H.R. 521 in that package, 
are submitted by Dairy Australia on behalf of dairy manufacturers and 
producers located in Australia.
    Dairy Australia is a private, not-for-profit industry services 
association. Dairy Australia's activities are funded by a compulsory 
check-off on all cows milk produced in Australia. The size of the 
check-off is decided by a vote of all economically active dairy farmers 
every three years.
    Australian dairy processors are globally competitive; producing 
high quality milk protein concentrates (MPC's) and casein (including 
caseinates). Exports of these value added dairy ingredients to the 
United States and a range of other countries are not subsidized i.e. 
Australian dairy processors rely solely on the market place for 
turnover and profitability. Australian origin casein exports have 
entered the U.S. market for over 50 years.
    This bill would establish tariff rate quotas (TRQ's) on MPC's and 
casein at levels less than 50 percent of respective volumes imported in 
2004. If implemented the out-of-quota or high tier TRQ ad-valorem rate, 
based on current import values, of 38 per cent for MPC and 44 percent 
for casein would effectively restrict trade to the in-quota volumes. 
This would allow no scope for innovative Australian dairy processors to 
grow, unhindered by non-commercial barriers, their business in the 
United States marketplace.
Background
    The Agricultural Adjustment Act of 1949 effectively eliminated, 
until 2003 the ability of U.S. domiciled manufacturers to operate a 
profitable casein industry; through adjusting the dairy price support 
program to economically encourage the drying of milk proteins into non-
fat dry milk (NDM) powder. (MPC was not commercially available in 
1949).The March 2001 General Accounting Office report \1\ noted the 
U.S. industry is hamstrung in trying to switching to value added milk 
protein ingredients because of ``economic disincentives'' created by 
the dairy price support system.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \1\ Reference is GAO-01-326, page 9.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Government policies can play an important role in influencing the 
competitiveness of dairy products and in turn influencing product mix 
decisions by processors. In this regard the 1979 International Trade 
Commission (ITC) Section 332 report noted that with the institution of 
the price support program, as mandated by the 1949 Agricultural 
Adjustment Act, domestic production of casein became less profitable 
than the production of NDM.
Benefits of MPC and casein
    MPC and casein imports benefit U.S. food manufacturers and 
ultimately consumers through;

    <bullet>  Providing tailored ingredients for specific end use(s) by 
food manufacturers
    <bullet>  Providing a high quality, nutritionally beneficial 
ingredient at a competitive price; see attachment
    <bullet>  Improving manufacturing efficiency through increasing 
yields and reducing waste products because of the high concentration, 
compared to possible substitutes such as NDM, of milk proteins

    In many instances MPC and casein do not replace domestic U.S. 
origin NDM because of superior nutritional functional and flavor 
attributes. NDM has substantially higher levels of lactose (milk sugar) 
and substantially lower levels of the commercially valuable milk 
protein.
    The major beneficiaries of TRQ's may be suppliers of non dairy 
substitutes such as soy; potentially causing a permanent loss of market 
opportunity for dairy proteins if ingredient users alter their recipe 
formulas.
    Imported MPC and casein have only played a very marginal, if at 
all, role in displacing domestically produced milk proteins. The 
International Trade Commission (ITC) report released in May 2004 \2\ 
stated that imported milk proteins that ``may'' have substituted for 
domestically produced milk proteins accounts for approximately only 
1.27 percent of U.S. milk protein production from 1998-2002.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \2\ Conditions of competition for Milk Protein Products in the U.S. 
market, Investigation No 332.-453, USITC Publication 3692, May 2004.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Australian MPC exports to the United States
    An example of a mutually beneficial commercial relationship is that 
between Australia's largest dairy processor, Murray Goulburn 
Cooperative and a family owned food company based in Illinois, Erie 
Foods International (Erie).
    The relationship evolved as a result of the impact on the U.S. 
dairy processing sector of the 1949 Agricultural Structural Adjustment 
Act. Erie was forced to stop the domestic manufacturing of casein 
because it became more economic to dry milk protein into the commodity 
product, NDM rather than convert into value added milk protein 
products.
    Erie began at that time a joint venture casein manufacturing 
operation in Australia with a predecessor company to Murray Goulburn. 
The commercial venture has prospered and has grown to include the 
import of milk protein concentrates.
    Australia has a long if varied history of exporting milk protein 
concentrates to United States. The original exporter was United Milk 
Tasmania. Exports by season were;

    <bullet>  1982/83          28 tonnes
    <bullet>  1983/84         170 tonnes
    <bullet>  1984/85         200 tonnes
    <bullet>  1985/86         125 tonnes
    <bullet>  1986/87         440 tonnes
    <bullet>  1987/88         100 tonnes

    Most of this was MPC 75 percent, although the following MPC's were 
made and exported; 42, 50, 56, 70, 75 and 80. The entire product was 
made via ultra-filtration.
    Australia since 1995 has been the third largest supplier of imports 
of milk proteins to the United States; behind New Zealand and the 
European Union who collectively dominate trade.
Tariff Classification History: Are MPC Imports taking advantage of a 
        U.S. Trade loophole?
    The short answer is no!
    Congress considered the issue of Customs classification of MPC in 
1984. Casein had previously been afforded duty free entry with zero 
quantitative (quota) restrictions because the 1949 Agricultural 
Structural Adjustment Act, by including NDM rather than casein in the 
price support program, had effectively decimated domestic production of 
the latter.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \3\ To quote from an Erie Foods letter to Representative Manzullo 
in March 2002; ``As a result of federal farm legislation in the late 
1940's, our company was forced to stop the domestic manufacturing of 
casein and began at that time a joint venture manufacturing operation 
in Australia which under Australian ownership continues to this day.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    In 1984 deliberations, the House Ways and Means Committee 
considered two very different approaches. The first was developed by 
the Senate Finance Committee, which had recommended a provision that 
would have defined milk protein concentrates narrowly. That committee 
observed that three recently developed dairy products were currently 
being classified in different ``basket'' categories, with;

    <bullet>  Whey protein concentrate classified as TSUS 183.05 (other 
edible preparations not specifically provided for), dutiable at 10 
percent ad valorem;
    <bullet>  Lactalbumin classified as TSUS 190.15 (albumin not 
specially provided for) free of duty; and
    <bullet>  Total milk proteinate classified as TSUS 493.17 (other 
casein and mixtures in chief value thereof) dutiable at 0.2 cents per 
pound

    The Senate provisions would have extended the scope of the existing 
quota provisions for dried milk, dried cream and dried whey (TSUS 
950.01 and 950.02) to cover the three new tariff categories as well, 
and would have made them subject to Section 22 quotas. However, the 
House Ways and Means Committee, by contrast, considered the Senate 
Approach but did not adopt it and it was not included in the 1984 law.
    The Summary of Provisions of HR 3398 (Trade and Tariff Act of 1984) 
as passed by the House and Senate (WMCP: 98-39) states: ``Under present 
law, whey protein concentrate, lactalbumin and milk protein concentrate 
are classified under various `basket' provisions in the TSUS. The 
conference agreement creates new tariff provisions for each of these 
recently developed dairy products. The applicable tariff rates remain 
unchanged and no quantitative restrictions would be imposed.''
    Thus, the conference committee's language indicates that while the 
Congress considered applying quotas to milk protein concentrates with 
40 percent or more protein by weight, it deliberately decided not to do 
so. Subsequently, the Uruguay Round Agreement converted the Section 22 
quotas to Tariff-Rate Quotas, and bound the United States to maintain 
its tariff treatment for milk protein concentrates as defined under the 
1984 law described above.
    In 1986, Congress modified the definition by changing ``albumin'' 
to ``lactalbumin''.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \4\ Page 8-4, section 123 of `The Trade and Tariff Act of 1984.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Decisions by the U.S. Customs Bureau in 2002 and 2003 have 
supported the existing Harmonized Tariff Schedule classification i.e. 
Note 13 to chapter 4 states ``For purposes of subheading 0404.90.10, 
the term ``milk protein concentrates'' means any complete milk protein 
(casein plus lactalbumin) concentrate that is 40 percent or more 
protein by weight''. Customs rejected petitions organized by the 
National Milk Producers Federation in 2002 and 2003 (Reg. 516 appeal) 
to reclassify imported milk protein concentrates into tariff lines 
covered by quotas.
    In all these instances the policy intention is clear; Congress and 
the Administration have determined not to place any restrictions on 
trade.
U.S. and International Market Conditions for Milk Proteins
    The issue of TRQ's on value added milk protein imports (MPC's, 
casein and caseinates) needs to be viewed within the broader context of 
favorable international market developments. Consecutive reductions in 
the NDM support price in May 2001 and November 2002 and a sustained 
upswing in the international (or traded) price for milk proteins since 
mid 2003 has resulted in the following favorable impacts for the U.S. 
dairy industry;

    <bullet>  The United States has emerged as a major, non subsidized 
exporter of milk proteins, primarily but not solely in the form of NDM 
in 2004 and 2005.
    <bullet>  The last subsidized sale under the Dairy Export Incentive 
Scheme or DEIP was awarded in January 2004.
    <bullet>  The emergence of an unsubsidized, import replacing MPC 
industry in the United States. Since the second half of 2003 a joint 
venture between Fonterra and Dairy Farmers of America the U.S.'s 
largest dairy co-operative has resulted in profitable production at 
Portales, New Mexico. A second MPC plant is now being developed in 
Arizona; (a joint venture between the United Dairymen of Arizona and 
Fonterra). Combined both plants will meet a large portion of total U.S. 
demand.
The consequences of ill-judged policy actions will commercially hurt 
        the U.S. dairy sector
    As mentioned earlier the competitive threat is very real and 
growing from non-dairy substitutes. Non-dairy proteins, particularly 
soy can and are used in many food applications, especially imitation 
cheese products, non-dairy creamers and whipped toppings. Additionally 
extensive work is being undertaken by major companies such as Solae and 
Bunge to develop non-dairy protein substitutes targeted at replacing 
milk proteins in all applications.
    Restricting access for milk protein products will increase the 
commercial incentives for non-dairy substitutes. This is detrimental to 
the economic well being of the dairy industry in the United States and 
globally.
H.R. 521 Violates U.S. Trade Commitments
    Increasing tariffs on MPC and casein would violate U.S. WTO 
obligations and the U.S. Free Trade Agreement with Australia. In these 
trade pacts, the U.S. has agreed to maintain a certain level of duties. 
If the U.S. unilaterally decides to raise its bound tariffs, Australia 
and other countries supplying these dairy proteins to the U.S. market 
have the right to seek compensation under Article XXVIII (28) of the 
WTO.
    Article XXVIII allows the U.S. Government to change WTO tariff 
concessions by negotiation and agreement. Any effort by the U.S. to 
change their commitments would involve either:

    <bullet>  A re-negotiation with key supplying countries who seek to 
maintain the status quo. A solution would offer corresponding 
concessions on other products.
    <bullet>  A unilateral change of the tariff rate and/or description 
by the U.S. This would almost certainly lead to a WTO dispute 
settlement action seeking either compensation and/or retaliating 
against U.S. origin imports.

    The Irish Dairy Board in an August 2001 note to the International 
Trade Commission calculated compensation arrangements with WTO partners 
such as the EU and New Zealand would amount to $447 million in 
additional trade concessions.
    The calculation is based on paragraph 6(b) of the `Understanding on 
the interpretation of Article XXVIII of GATT 1994'. The paragraph 
states ``when an unlimited tariff concession is replaced by a tariff 
rate quota, the amount of compensation provided should exceed the 
amount of trade actually affected by the modification of the 
concession''. Point (b) of this paragraph provides for the calculation 
to be based on trade in the most recent year increased by 10 per cent.
    In respect of the U.S.-Australia Free Trade Agreement the relevant 
article states that neither party may increase existing duties other 
than as permitted under the Agreement.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \5\ The relevant articles which describe how tariff elimination is 
to be carried out are;
    Article 2.3--Elimination of Customs Duties

    <bullet>  Paragraph 1--tariff elimination should be in accordance 
with Annex 2-B
    <bullet>  Paragraph 2--neither party may increase existing duties 
other than as permitted under the agreement

    Annex 2-B--Tariff Elimination

    <bullet>  Paragraph 1--base rates reflect rates in effect 1 January 
2004
    <bullet>  Paragraph 2--sets out staging categories for tariff 
elimination, with additional categories in each party's schedule

    Schedule of the United States--General Notes

    <bullet>  Paragraph 4(b)--staging category F--duties removed in 
equal annual installments over 18 years
    <bullet>  U.S. Tariff Schedule--35011010 (MPC's)--base rate 0.37c/
kg, staging category F

    Any alleged breach of the AUSFTA would go through the agreement's 
dispute settlement provisions--details set out in Chapter 21 of the 
Agreement. The Agreement was implemented on January 1, 2005.
    In addition to the economic effects of the retaliation, the U.S. 
would undermine its credibility to negotiate reduced agricultural trade 
barriers (to market access) in the Doha Development Round of trade 
negotiations. As a leader in advocating free trade, it would be highly 
inconsistent for the U.S. to erect any new trade barriers.
    In conclusion TRQ's on MPC and casein would severely restrict the 
ability of U.S. food and non-food manufacturers to choose sourcing of 
inputs; potentially add to the cost of food and reduce consumer welfare 
through restricting supply of an essential ingredient; open the door 
for functionally inferior non-dairy substitutes potentially leading to 
a long-term loss of market opportunity; discourage product innovation 
and product development that would increase consumer choice and help 
consumers develop more nutritious diets, reduce competition in the U.S. 
dairy market and result in the United States flouting their WTO and 
bilateral (with Australia) trade commitments at a period when a 
critical stage is being entered in the Doha Development Round.
                                                      Robert Pettit
           Manager Americas and Caribbean--Trade and Strategy Group

                                 <F-dash>

                                                     Blank Rome LLP
                                               Washington, DC 20037
                                                  September 2, 2005
Rep. E. Clay Shaw, Jr.
Chairman, Subcommittee on Trade
Committee on Ways and Means
U.S. House of Representatives
Washington, DC 20515

Dear Chairman Shaw:

    On July 25 you invited public comment on a number of bills proposed 
for inclusion in a package of miscellaneous tariff measures. These 
comments are submitted on behalf of Fonterra (USA), Inc., Lemoyne, PA, 
in opposition to the inclusion of H.R. 521 in that package.
    In brief, this bill would establish tariff rate quotas (TRQs) on 
milk protein concentrate and casein (including caseinate) at severely 
restrictive levels--less than 50% of the milk protein concentrate and 
casein imported in 2004 would enter at current rates. In both cases the 
above TRQ ad valorem rate, based on current import values--38.2% for 
MPC and 44.4% for casein--are clearly prohibitive.
    In an attempt to add a patina of legitimacy to such onerous trade 
restrictions, the bill has been drafted in terms of the withdrawal of 
concessions under Article XXVIII of the GATT. However, dressing up 
these proposals as purported legitimate exercises of WTO rights cannot 
hide the significant costs of the legislation, both in real dollars to 
consumers and manufacturers, and in trade policy terms to the United 
States. To erect a barrier under the guise of Article XXVIII, when in 
fact the motivation for the measure lies in domestic politics, invites 
others to renege on their trade commitments at the behest of changing 
political winds.
    Indeed, given those political winds here in the U.S., in May of 
2003 Senate Finance Committee Chairman Grassley requested that the 
International Trade Commission (ITC) investigate the competitive 
conditions surrounding imported milk proteins In May of 2004 the ITC 
reported on its unprecedented year-long investigation into the 
economics of imported milk proteins (Conditions of Competition for Milk 
Protein Products in the U.S. Market, Investigation No. 332-453, USITC 
Publication 3692, May 2004). That report clarifies the facts and 
dispels the economic myths regarding the impact these proteins have on 
the U.S. domestic dairy industry. The ITC report is the most 
comprehensive and authoritative analysis ever undertaken concerning the 
economics of trade in milk proteins. Among its findings are the 
following:

    <bullet>  With respect to the assertion that milk protein imports 
play a major role in depressing U.S.. milk prices, the ITC concludes 
that

    ``The data do not show a clear and direct relationship between 
imports of milk protein products and the all-milk price in all years.'' 
(Page 9-4). The report notes that the ITC reviewed a broad range of 
studies by prominent dairy economists and, ``Even though these studies 
differed in terms of modeling approaches, commodity coverage, and base 
year, they generally found that imports of milk protein products have 
had little impact on farm-level prices in the U.S. market.'' (Page 9-
23).
    The report explains that domestic pricing of milk proteins, such as 
skim milk powder (SMP), and farm gate milk prices are largely a 
function of domestic government policies. ``The effect of imported milk 
proteins on farm-level prices depends on whether the market price for 
SMP is at, or above, the support price. Since SMP market prices were 
generally equal to the support price over the study period, most of the 
effect of imported milk protein was through U.S. Government purchases 
of SMP . . .'' (Page xxxiii) Interestingly the government is not now 
buying SMP and has disposed of virtually all of its accumulated stocks.

    <bullet>  With respect to the assertion that milk protein imports 
play a major role in displacing domestic milk proteins production, the 
report states on ``a protein basis, imports of MPC, casein and 
caseinate may have displaced 318 million pounds of U.S.-produced milk 
proteins between 1998-2002.'' (Page xxxii).

    To put this in context, the 318 million pounds of imported milk 
proteins that ``may'' have substituted for domestically produced milk 
proteins accounts for approximately only 1.27 percent of U.S. milk 
protein production from 1998-2002. It is not credible to argue that 
this degree of possible substitution is a major factor in the economics 
of the dairy market.

    <bullet>  With respect to the assertion that foreign government 
practices, notably E.U. subsidies, are the major factor driving imports 
and inhibiting a U.S. casein, caseinate and MPC industry, the report 
states, ``the Commission's questionnaire price data indicate that if 
price leadership exists in the U.S. MPC market, it is exercised by the 
Oceania countries.'' (Page 5-7). The report notes the fact that New 
Zealand and Australia are the lowest cost major producers of milk 
proteins in the world. The report states, ``Overall, the IFCN findings 
show milk production costs to be lowest in New Zealand and Australia, 
and to a lesser extent, the EU, where cows are generally fed by 
rotational grazing. In this aspect of dairy farming, Australia, New 
Zealand, and the EU operations have a distinct advantage over their 
counterparts in the United States, where dairy cows are fed forage and 
expensive concentrates.'' (Page 5-2). Moreover, the ITC found that the 
level of government support of the dairy industries in both Australia 
and New Zealand was far below that received in the U.S. and EU. ``New 
Zealand has the lowest percentage of dairy farm receipts from 
government support policies at less than 1 percent during the period.'' 
(Page 5-7).

    What the ITC report did find is that the ``most important factors 
affecting the competitiveness of milk protein industries are the cost 
of milk production and government programs.'' (Page 5-1). The ITC 
report explicitly points to disincentives to the U.S. production of 
these milk proteins. These disincentives include the U.S. dairy price 
support program, the milk marketing order system and the Food and Drug 
Administration's ``standards of identity'' which proscribe certain 
ingredients for certain foods, including a number of dairy products. 
The report states, ``At the same time, U.S. government support for SMP 
reduces the incentives to produce MPC and casein in the United 
States.'' (Page 5-1). In possibly its most direct statement on this 
topic, the report notes, ``U.S. production of these products is 
limited, and likely to remain limited, so long as the current Federal 
Milk Marketing Order and Dairy Price Support Program prices remain in 
effect.'' (Page 7-24).

    <bullet>  With respect to the assertion that imports of 
concentrated milk proteins are ``loophole'' products and that U.S. 
policymakers failed to reflect upon these proteins in developing and 
implementing U.S. trade policy, the ITC report notes that, ``The Trade 
and Tariff Act of 1984 created a new TSUS rate line for MPC. 
Specifically section 123 of that Act established TSUS item 118.45, 
covering MPC, with a duty rate of 0.2 cents per pound (the same rate 
then in effect for casein under TSUS 493.17) and not subject to fees or 
quantitative restrictions under section 22. Section 123 also created a 
TSUS legal note defining the scope of the new MPC rate line. The note 
stated, that ``for purposes of item 118.45, the term `milk protein 
concentrate' means any complete milk protein (casein plus albumin) 
concentrate that is 40 percent or more protein by weight. In 1986, 
Congress modified the definition by changing ``albumin'' to 
``lactalbumin.'' (Page 8-4). Clearly both the Congress and 
Administration have been paying attention for a long time.

    In addition it should be noted that:

    <bullet>  Both milk protein concentrate and casein imports 
substantially benefit U.S. industry and consumers by:

      -- making available specialized products not available from 
domestic sources
      -- contributing to the ability of industry to utilize new 
technology to make new products
      -- encouraging the introduction of new products targeted toward 
particular market segments such as geriatric foods and athletic drinks
      -- improving process efficiency by increasing yields and reducing 
waste product, the disposal of which is a continuing problem for the 
industry.
      -- The introduction of quotas would impose additional costs on 
the U.S. food industry and would reduce their competitiveness 
substantially. Rather than providing additional benefits for the food 
and dairy industries, the imposition of quotas would have significant 
downsides.
      -- In most end uses imported MPC and casein do not replace U.S. 
non-fat dry milk (NFDM) or other milk supplies, as both MPC and casein 
have nutritional, functional and flavor attributes not shared by NFDM. 
For example, for nutritional products, NFDM contains too much lactose 
and too little protein. Other proteins such as soy are often better 
substitutes for MPC and casein than NFDM.
      -- To illustrate the widespread application of casein and MPC, we 
have attached to this letter a list of some generic uses for them. As 
you will note, the uses are strikingly broad. A catalog of branded 
products containing these ingredients would certainly number in the 
hundreds, and likely in the thousands.
      -- MPC and casein duties were bound in the WTO by the U.S. in the 
Uruguay Round. Thus the U.S. may not increase the tariffs or impose 
quotas on these items without backtracking on its international 
obligations. We understand that the Irish Dairy Board has supplied the 
International Trade Commission with an estimate of the costs that would 
be involved in Article XXVIII compensation, which they estimate to be 
447 million dollars.
      -- Clearly Article XXVIII was not intended to be utilized in the 
erection of barriers to newly developed and technologically 
sophisticated products, whose domestic development has been inhibited 
by U.S. support policies.
      -- Finally, it should be noted that Fonterra, in a joint venture 
with Dairy Farmers of America, has begun MPC production in Portales, 
New Mexico without a U.S. subsidy; dispelling any idea that the U.S. 
producers are not able to compete against imports. The plant in 
Portales is profitably responding to the market demand for MPC and is 
running at full capacity. As a result of its success, a second plant is 
being developed in Arizona to meet market demand, and when both plants 
are operational (not to mention the prospect of additional capacity), 
nearly half of U.S. domestic demand will be met by U.S. domestic 
production--a dramatic change from just over 2 years ago.

    In summary, the adoption of this bill would limit the access of 
U.S. manufacturers of a wide range of food, nutritional and medical 
products to ingredients which have been tailored to their particular 
products. It would drive up their costs or force them to substitute 
functionally inferior ingredients such as soy based proteins. In either 
case, both they and the consumers they supply would be ill served. 
Moreover, the U.S. would be obligated to pay significant compensation 
to supplying countries, while creating a terrible precedent for others 
to renege on their international obligations as we enter the final 
stages of the Doha Development Round of trade negotiations.
                                                  Edward J. Farrell

                                 <F-dash>

                                                      General Mills
                                               Washington, DC 20005
                                                    August 23, 2005
The Honorable E. Clay Shaw, Jr.
Chairman, Subcommittee on Trade
House Committee on Ways and Means
1102 Longworth House Office Building
Washington, DC 20515

Dear Chairman Shaw:

    General Mills appreciates this opportunity to offer comments to the 
Committee regarding including HR 521 in the Technical Corrections to 
U.S. Trade Laws and Miscellaneous Duty Suspension Bills. General Mills 
joins many others in strongly opposing the inclusion of HR 521. HR 521 
is extraordinarily controversial; its adoption would imperil U.S. trade 
negotiations and blunt the innovation of products using dairy 
ingredients.
    General Mills is a significant user of internationally sourced 
caseins and caseinates, utilized to produce some of the best-known 
consumer food products in the country. Tariffs on these proteins will 
substantially increase raw material costs for domestic food processors, 
negatively impact consumers, and ultimately be ineffective in solving 
our country's dairy oversupply problem.
    Caseins and caseinates exhibit unique product characteristics and 
provide functionality not available with domestic dairy alternatives. 
Casein is produced from skim milk by removing sugars, minor proteins, 
and minerals by using enzymes and acid to physically separate these 
components from the casein. Unfortunately, in the United States, 
government subsidies cause casein production to be uneconomical. Milk 
processors have an incentive to dry skim into non-fat dry milk (NFDM) 
and sell this product to the government at the support price levels, 
bypassing the casein production process. While NFDM is useful in many 
food processing applications, it lacks many of the characteristics 
needed for certain applications; including, attributes needed in the 
production of substitute cheese for use in low cost food applications 
and various baking applications.
    The deficit supply environment for caseins and caseinates in the 
U.S., combined with the unique functionality of these proteins in food 
processing, means that General Mills will continue to import these 
proteins regardless of import tariffs. This will inevitably pressure 
consumer food prices higher on products designed to be economical 
alternatives for lower income consumers. Simultaneously, stocks of NFDM 
will rise regardless, as the root cause of the dairy oversupply problem 
has not been addressed: government subsidies causing inefficient market 
allocation of domestic dairy products. NFDM production is so healthy 
that the United States is quickly becoming a major global supplier of 
this commodity.
    General Mills strongly opposes the proposed tariff-quota structure 
for proteins, caseins, and caseinates. The impact of this legislation 
would be negative for U.S. consumers, bad for international trade 
relations, and ineffective in encouraging greater use of domestic dairy 
products. Interestingly enough, recent developments in the industry 
have seen the birth of what may be a robust domestic milk protein 
sector--this of course is occurring in the absence of a tariff-rate 
quota, and is the product of market demand for supply. Furthermore, in 
its nonpartisan review of this issue released last year after more than 
one year of investigation, the U.S. International Trade Commission 
found no correlation between the use of these imported proteins and 
domestic NFDM prices.
    We appreciate the consideration of our views.
            Sincerely,
                                                 Jeffrey A. Shapiro
                                          Washington Representative

                                 <F-dash>

                                  Grocery Manufacturers Association
                                            Washington, D.C., 20037
                                                    August 30, 2005
The Honorable E. Clay Shaw, Jr.
Chairman, Subcommittee on Trade
Committee on Ways and Means
U.S. House of Representatives
1104 Longworth House Office Building
Washington, DC 20515-6354

Dear Mr. Chairman:

    The Grocery Manufacturers Association (GMA) appreciates this 
opportunity to provide our views to the Subcommittee on Trade on why 
H.R. 521 should not be included in the U.S. Trade Laws and 
Miscellaneous Duty Suspension Bills under consideration in this 
session. The tariffs proposed under H.R. 521 would not protect the U.S. 
dairy industry as that bill implies and would impose additional costs 
to the U.S. consumer.
    GMA is the world's largest association of food, beverage and 
consumer product companies. With U.S. sales of more than 500 billion 
dollars, GMA member companies employ more than 2.5 million workers in 
all 50 states.
    The premise of H.R. 521 is that the U.S. dairy industry needs 
protection from the import of casein and milk protein concentrates. 
This argument is erroneous on two levels. First, dairy prices are not 
being affected by the import of MPC and casein. The U.S. Department of 
Agriculture 2004 all-milk price paid to farmers was $16.04 per 
hundredweight (cwt), while the average has been $13.57 cwt for the last 
ten years. The forecasts for 2005 peg the all-milk prices as the third 
highest on record and these prices are in no way negatively affected by 
the import of MPCs (see ITC Investigation No. 332-453, May 2004 
comments below). Second, with the exception of one relatively new 
facility in Portales, New Mexico, no highly-filtered milk products are 
currently produced in the U.S. These filtered milk products have 
certain desirable qualities not present in dry skim milk products and 
which could not be easily replaced by less filtered dairy inputs.
    MPC and casein are both milk-derived ingredients that have been 
processed to retain and concentrate their protein content but extract 
certain other elements, such as ash or lactose (which some people are 
allergic to). These protein-rich ingredients provide valuable 
nutritional and technical properties to a wide variety of consumer 
foods and nutrition products produced by GMA member companies, 
including infant formula, sports drinks and ``power'' bars, diet 
supplement products, snack foods, hot dogs, cheese products, as well as 
many others.
    Reasonable access to imports of MPC and casein is particularly 
critical because there is, virtually, no domestic production of these 
processed dairy ingredients in the United States. Yet milk producers 
have amplified their call for tariff legislation, arguing that MPC 
``circumvents'' dairy tariffs and displace domestically produced non-
fat dry milk.
From the United States International trade Commission 332 Report on 
        Imported Dairy Proteins Conclusions Regarding Substitutability:
    The International Trade Commission carefully analyzed the issues 
relating to the use of imported dairy proteins in its Section 332 
Report, including the possible substitution of milk protein concentrate 
(MPC) for skim milk powder (SMP). While the ITC report concludes that 
imports of casein, caseinate and MPC may have substituted for 
domestically produced milk proteins, like SMP, in some applications 
because of their superior functionality and pricing, they find such 
substitution to be limited. Specifically, the report states that on ``a 
protein basis, imports of MPC, casein and caseinate may have displaced 
318 million pounds of U.S.-produced milk proteins between 1998-2002.'' 
USITC, Conditions of Competition for Milk Protein Products in the U.S. 
Market, Investigation No. 332-453, USITC Publication 3692 (2004) at 7-
13. To put this in context, the report notes that the U.S. annually 
produces over 170 billion pounds of milk, so that the 318 million 
pounds of imported milk proteins that ``may'' have substituted for 
domestically produced milk proteins accounts for just 1.27 percent of 
U.S. milk protein production from 1998-2002. It is simply not credible 
to argue that this degree of possible substitution is a significant 
factor in the economics of the dairy market. Further, the ITC report 
notes that:

    <bullet>  ``There appears to be little substitution between 
imported and U.S.-produced milk proteins in the specialty nutrition 
products.'' Id at 7-22; and
    <bullet>  ``To a lesser extent, manufacturers are substituting 
imported casein and caseinate for SMP, WPC, UF milk, and ingredient 
cheese in processed cheese products, other dairy foods, and bakery 
products.'' Id at 7-22; and, finally
    <bullet>  ``It appears that the majority of this substitution 
occurs in the production of processed cheese products where MPC 
substitutes for SMP, UF milk, and ingredient cheese.'' Id at 7-22.

    With respect to this final point, it appears to the U.S. Coalition 
for Nutritional Ingredients that the ITC's assumptions concerning such 
substitution overlook certain commercial realities. Namely,
1. High switching costs
    The Report states that the fact that process cheese products 
utilizing these alternative ingredients can be made in the same plants 
using the same equipment ``may indicate that the switching costs of 
producing processed cheese products with SMP versus MPC are minimal.'' 
(7-13, emphasis added.) However, the Report does not include any data 
relating to switching costs. In fact, Coalition members have spent 
millions of dollars over several years improving their products though 
the use of MPC. Coalition members' manufacturing processes cannot 
accommodate switching back and forth between MPC and SMP depending on 
the relative cost and availability of those ingredients. If process 
cheese manufactures were required to stop using MPC in their products, 
they would incur several million dollars in costs to switch to new 
formulas.
2. The technical superiority of MPC in process cheese.
    The Report notes that 99% of the MPC used in process cheese 
products is high protein MPC, with a protein percentage of 70% or 
greater (91% MPC 70-79 and 8% MPC 80-89). (Table 7-3) Almost all of the 
imported MPC used in the process cheese products produced by Coalition 
members is high-protein MPC, produced through the ultrafiltration 
process in New Zealand, and to a lesser extent in Australia. (Coalition 
members have also begun using newly available high-protein, 
ultrafiltered domestic MPC.) Low-protein MPC produced by blending is 
not suitable for processed cheese applications. The high-protein, UF 
MPC products used to manufacture process cheese have a protein 
concentration double that of SMP, greater consistency, and low lactose 
levels. For example, MPC-70 has a lactose content of 17% compared to 
over 50% for SMP.
    The ITC notes that high-protein MPC is technically superior to SMP 
in process cheese products, making the following specific observations, 
with which the Coalition agrees:

    <bullet>  ``Lactose is a problematic ingredient in a number of 
dairy products. Therefore, alternative protein sources that can deliver 
the desired protein without the lactose are appealing for the 
production of products where excess lactose is a concern.'' (7-10)
    <bullet>  ``. . . industry and academic experts stressed the 
importance of controlling the amount of lactose present during the 
manufacturing of both natural and processed cheese. Excess lactose 
reacts with water to form crystals, results in poor cooking and melting 
properties, and over time, may alter the color, flavor and consistency 
of the product.'' (7-10)
    <bullet>  ``. . . The use of MPC instead of SMP can improve the 
efficiency of the production process and thereby lower total production 
costs.'' (7-13)
    <bullet>  The ITC recognizes that even if some manufacturers may 
have reduced their purchases of SMP and other U.S. dairy proteins as 
they developed formulas including MPC, they are not likely to reverse 
that process, due to the technical superiority of MPC:
    <bullet>  ``However, while manufacturers may readily switch from 
U.S.-produced to imported milk proteins, they are somewhat less likely 
to switch from imported to U.S.-produced milk proteins. Barring 
significant changes in relative prices, the superior functional 
properties of imported milk proteins discourage switching to SMP, UF 
milk, WPC or ingredient cheese from MPC.''

    (7-22, emphasis added.) In other words, once a company has invested 
in using a superior ingredient, it is far less likely to make another 
significant investment to be able to use a less-desirable ingredient, 
even if there is a price advantage. U.S. process cheese manufacturers, 
and their customers, do not regard substituting a higher-priced, 
inferior ingredient as a rational substitution.
3. The MPC used in process cheese is not subsidized.
    The claims of the TRQ proponents that they need to be protected 
from ``unfairly subsidized'' imported MPC are particularly inapt in the 
case of process cheese. The high-protein MPC used in process cheese is 
manufactured through the ultrafiltration process in New Zealand and 
Australia, as noted above. As the Report clearly demonstrates in 
Chapter 5, there are virtually no subsidies on the production of MPC in 
New Zealand and very low subsidies in Australia. (See Table 5-5, which 
shows a Producer Support Estimate of less than 1% for New Zealand, 
compared to 44% to 60% for the U.S.)
Conclusion
    GMA is opposed to any attempt to impose higher tariffs or 
restrictive tariff-rate quotas on imports of MPC or casein. The U.S. 
dairy industry is under no threat from substitution with imported 
filtered milk products such as MPCs and casein. Dairy prices are at an 
all-time high making any further protections of that industry 
unnecessary. For these reasons, GMA would argue against such a bill in 
any forum. Given that H.R. 521 has been placed in the Miscellaneous 
Tariff Bill, we would also argue that this is a controversial bill, 
traditionally not the kind of bill considered under suspension of the 
rules.
    The Grocery Manufacturers Association appreciates this opportunity 
to present our views on this matter.
                                                        Mary Sophos
            Senior Vice President, Chief Government Affairs Officer

                                 <F-dash>

                                                     Kerry Americas
                                                   Beloit, WI 53511
                                                  September 1, 2005
Chairman E. Clay Shaw, Jr.
Subcommittee on Trade, Committee on Ways and Means U.S. House of 
    Representatives
1104 Longworth House Office Building
Washington, D.C. 20515-6354

Dear Mr. Chairman:

    I am writing in strong opposition to the inclusion of H.R. 521, a 
bill that would impose highly damaging tariff-rate quotas (TRQs) on 
U.S. imports of casein, caseinate and milk protein concentrates (MPCs), 
in the pending Miscellaneous Tariff Bill (MTB).
    We, along with many companies, utilize these milk proteins to 
produce a variety of food ingredients and other related products that 
are valuable to our customers both in the U.S. and abroad. Our company 
imports these milk proteins to help satisfy our customer needs in a 
number of our manufactured products. In fact, if these tariffs were to 
go into effect it would damage our ability to continue our growth as a 
company that is headquartered in Wisconsin and employs over 1,000 
people in that state alone, but also people in many more states where 
we take pride in producing to meet our customers needs. We also export 
our products, which is another reason why we are particularly concerned 
about H.R. 521 because it may result in retaliation against the very 
products we export not to mention other U.S. exporters.
    We know the milk proteins sector has been studied in depth by the 
U.S. International Trade Commission (ITC) as recently as 2004. A fair 
reading of the ITC report does not provide a foundation for the 
imposition of legislation like H.R. 521. As you well know, this 
independent unprecedented fact-finding investigation and the subsequent 
report should serve as a basis to reject protectionism as it relates to 
milk proteins. Furthermore, the trade and economic conditions in this 
sector since the period that was studied (1998-2002) by the ITC further 
drive home the point that protectionism is the wrong course.
    I know there are many arguments that have been tossed around 
regarding this issue on both sides. But, as a business executive that 
manages competitive manufacturing in the U.S. for a global market, H.R. 
521--if enacted--would be exactly what we do not need. It would cause 
us significant damage and signal us that additional investment in 
growth may not make sense. Why would anyone with the responsibility to 
oversee U.S. trade policy want to knowingly significantly damage 
competitive manufacturing and food ingredient production in America? 
Such action would only harm the market for dairy-based ingredients and, 
in the end, dairy farmers interested in supplying these growing 
markets. I strongly urge you to not include H.R. 521 in the MTB and to 
reject any efforts to impede U.S. trade in these milk proteins.
                                                      Stan McCarthy
                                                  President and CEO

                                 <F-dash>

   Statement of Jaime Castaneda, National Milk Producers Federation, 
                          Arlington, Virginia
Executive Summary
    The fundamental cornerstone of federal policy toward the U.S. dairy 
industry consists of the dairy price support program, operating in 
conjunction with WTO-consistent restrictions on imports of dairy 
products that permit the price support program to function in the 
presence of a highly-distorted and subsidized world market. Milk 
protein products, consisting of milk protein concentrate and casein, 
constitute a loophole in these import restrictions. As a result of this 
loophole, U.S. imports and use of these milk protein products have 
grown rapidly over the past decade, driven by foreign subsidies, both 
domestic and export subsidies, and by foreign monopoly exporting 
advantages.
    In recent years, rapid growth in U.S. milk protein imports 
economically displaced an equivalent quantity of domestically-produced 
milk proteins, creating a large, artificial surplus of nonfat dry milk 
that has been sold to the Commodity Credit Corporation (CCC) under the 
price support program. This displacement eroded the effectiveness of 
the price support program, leading to significantly lower prices and 
incomes for U.S. dairy farmers and increased cost for U.S. taxpayers.
    The fact is that milk protein is milk protein. When additional 
amounts of milk protein are permitted to evade the underlying intent of 
our dairy import policies, the natural consequence is that 
domestically-produced milk proteins will be displaced. This is exactly 
what occurred during the recently past period of extremely low prices 
as evidenced by the close correlation between CCC purchases and 
additional imported milk proteins during that time period. The U.S. 
milk protein import loophole has essentially converted the U.S. 
domestic dairy price support program into an additional subsidy for the 
already subsidized foreign manufacturers of milk protein products and 
for domestic manufacturers of dairy products, at the expense of U.S. 
dairy farmers and taxpayers.
    Economic analysis shows that U.S. milk protein imports will 
continue to grow and contribute to the volatility of producers' 
incomes. This continued trend will further depress U.S. farm prices and 
incomes during times of price troughs, rendering the dairy price 
support program increasingly ineffective, and exacerbating the U.S. 
dairy industry's nonfat milk solids component surplus which often 
accrues during low price periods. We estimate that projected growth in 
U.S. imports of milk protein products will erode dairy farm prices and 
lead to a cumulative loss of U.S. dairy farm income of about $2.7 
billion dollars between 2005 and 2012. This economic situation is not 
sustainable and is undermining the stability of the U.S. dairy industry 
and threatening its long-term ability to be a reliable supplier to one 
of the world's largest markets for milk and dairy products.
    In order to rectify this situation, NMPF has worked with Members of 
Congress to propose legislation to address this tariff loophole (H.R. 
521 and S. 1417). These bills would create tariff-rate quotas for 
imported milk protein concentrate and casein products in order to allow 
a certain level of existing imports to continue, but to get a handle on 
explosive future growth of these imports. Despite the current favorable 
prices dairy producers are enjoying, milk prices are notoriously 
cyclical. This legislation is urgently needed to avert subjecting dairy 
producers to the devastating price circumstances they faced in 2002 and 
early 2003, which contributed to the extremely erratic prices of the 
past few years. This measure is in the interest of the U.S. dairy 
industry as a whole, since no part of the industry is well-served by 
the extremely volatile milk prices we have seen of late.
Introduction
    The National Milk Producers Federation (NMPF) is the national farm 
commodity organization that represents dairy farmers and the dairy 
cooperative marketing associations they own and operate throughout the 
United States. The U.S. dairy industry is the second largest 
agricultural commodity subsector, as measured by farm cash receipts, 
generating an average of $24.3 billion in annual farm receipts from 
sales of milk during 2003-2004. The retail value of dairy products made 
from milk produced in the U.S. is estimated at approximately $90 
billion last year. There were 70,209 commercial dairy farms in the U.S. 
in 2003, each generating an estimated average of 16.7 jobs at the dairy 
farm and dairy processing plant level, for an estimated national total 
of 1,170,000 domestic jobs, not counting jobs at other levels in the 
agricultural and food industry, such as input suppliers, distribution, 
retailing and food service. By any measure, the U.S. dairy industry is 
a major domestic industry.
    The United States is also one of the world's largest and most 
attractive markets for the sale of milk and dairy products. Imports of 
many dairy products into the U.S. market are restricted under various 
tariff-rate quotas (TRQs), whose imposition is due to long-standing 
federal policy to operate the dairy price support program as the 
fundamental farm policy safety net program for U.S. milk producers. 
Without import restrictions, this policy could not be effectuated, 
given the significant distortions and subsidies that characterize the 
world market for dairy products.
    However, under the World Trade Organization Agreement on 
Agriculture, negotiated in the Uruguay Round, the United States 
significantly expanded access to its domestic dairy market and 
relinquished its previous ability under Section 22 of the Agricultural 
Adjustment Act to impose import restrictions in reaction to potential 
loopholes, changing market conditions and technological advances. 
During the ten-year period of 1995 through 2004, U.S. imports of total 
milk solids (milkfat plus nonfat milk solids) in all dairy products 
almost doubled, from about 475 million pounds to about 930 million 
pounds. During this same period, the share of total imported milk 
solids that were imported in the form of dairy products within tariff-
rate quotas declined, from 32 percent to 25 percent.
U.S. Imports of Milk Protein Products are Increasing on a Long-Term 
        Basis
    A major class of dairy imports that has been growing without 
restriction during the past decade has been milk protein products. 
These consist of milk protein concentrate (MPC), HTS 0404.90.10, which 
U.S. Customs defines as containing between 40 percent and 90 percent 
milk protein; milk protein concentrate, HTS 3501.10.10, which Customs 
defines as containing at least 90 percent milk protein; casein, HTS 
3501.10.50; and caseinates, HTS 3501.90.60. None of these four products 
is subject to TRQs when imported into the United States. Casein is 
imported free of duty, while the other three products are subject to a 
negligible duty of $.0037 per kilogram, which is equivalent to about 
one-tenth of one percent, on an ad valorem basis.
    Figure 1, below, shows annual imports of these four milk protein 
products during 1993 through 2004, and forecasts for 2005, based on 
imports during the first five months of the year. Data are from the 
U.S. Bureau of the Census, as reported by the USDA Foreign Agricultural 
Service. MPC imported under 0404.90.10 could contain milk protein 
contents of 40 to 70 percent, and is designated as MPC-low, while MPC 
imported under 3501.10.10 is assumed to contain an average milk protein 
content of 90 percent, and is designated as MPC-high.
    Imports of these milk protein products, particularly MPC-low, have 
clearly been growing over this period. Imports of this product 
experienced a one-year drop in 2001 due to severe supply constraints 
and restrictions on imports from the European Union in the wake of the 
foot-and-mouth disease outbreak (see Figure 2 below) and to possible 
reaction to highly visible efforts by NMPF to curb these imports. 
Following that, import levels again began to grow in 2002 before 
becoming subject to outside market conditions for a time.
    As seen in the graph, import levels in the first quarter of 2005 
have spiked compared to 2004 levels. This has occurred despite tight 
world supplies of milk protein, indicating a likely return to the 
general trend of increasing import quantities of these products. This 
development concurs with NMPF's repeated previous statements concerning 
the fact that, although MPC and casein imports had temporarily declined 
for a time, that state of the market was by no means permanent. Rather, 
as we are currently seeing, the overall trend of the past decade has 
been for these import levels to climb--often drastically. This is 
precisely why a long-term solution, such as H.R. 521, is needed to 
address this loophole. Better to act now to head off a problem than to 
see dairy prices plummet to record lows again in the future if Congress 
does not take measures to address this situation.
    Moreover, in a letter (available for subsequent submission) dated 
April 28, 2003, the U.S. customs identified a number of cases in which 
imported MPC is a blended product based on 90 percent skim milk powder. 
Also noteworthy is a letter that the National Milk Producers Federation 
sent to the ITC on October 4, 2001 (also available for subsequent 
submission) wherein we noted that a market basket survey of several 
large chain grocery stores revealed that all surveyed stores carried 
cheese products that contained MPC as a listed ingredient. Although 
this survey was limited in scope, concentrating on the Washington, DC 
area and a few selected stores in the Midwest, the findings 
conclusively showed how wide-spread the use of MPC is, even in the 
production of standardized cheese products.
    Casein and caseinates are not produced commercially in the United 
States because they can be imported at a lower protein-equivalent price 
than domestically-produced milk proteins. MPC-high and MPC-low are 
produced commercially in the United States, but operations can not be 
expanded because the same products, whether they are skim milk powder 
or some other form of milk protein concentrate, can be imported at a 
lower price. This, in turn, is due to the fact that the production and 
marketing of these products by other countries is largely subsidized 
and because we do not have a specific subsidy program for skim milk 
that allows U.S. manufacturers to dump their product into world markets 
such as those in Europe, Canada and New Zealand.
    Figure 2 shows the country of origin for imports of the four milk 
protein products during 1998-2004. New Zealand and the European Union 
account for the large majority of all products in each of these years. 
New Zealand markets these products through monopoly state trading, 
which allows it to cross-subsidize among markets and products. The 
European Union operates a subsidy program for the production of casein 
and caseinates, which allows it to export large quantities of these 
products below its costs of production, just as its direct export 
subsidies allow it to export large quantities of butter, milk powder 
and cheese below cost. The EU's program for aid to the production of 
casein and caseinates also allows it to export blends of these products 
with skim milk powder and whey as milk protein concentrate, despite the 
fact that the Harmonized Tariff Schedules of the United States impose 
higher tariffs for skim milk powder.
    As discussed above, the large drop in MPC-low imports from the EU 
in 2001, following the foot-and-mouth disease outbreak, can be clearly 
noted in Figure 2.
    Canada and various eastern European countries, which export smaller 
quantities of milk protein products to the United States, also use 
export subsidies to do so. In Canada's case, the subsidies in question 
have operated outside the sanction of the World Trade Organization. 
These distortions created by monopoly advantages and by domestic and 
export subsidies are responsible for making MPC and casein available at 
a lower cost to U.S. purchasers. The very reason these products are so 
financially attractive to processors and manufacturers in the U.S. is 
because other countries have orchestrated their dairy programs to make 
them artificially affordable. Therefore, advocating a ``free-market'' 
approach where importers can purchase whatever product is the lowest 
cost ingredient essentially advocates undercutting the U.S. commitment 
to minimal domestic market intervention and supports a global system of 
artificially-low offered prices.
    The primary reason why MPC and casein are being imported into the 
United States in large and increasing quantities is because, for 
reasons addressed above, they provide food processors with a lower-cost 
source of the dairy components that they would otherwise procure from 
domestic milk producers. The real concern is that many companies may 
initially convert because of the price differential. However, once they 
have invested the necessary resources in restructuring their operations 
to accommodate the use of imported milk protein products, there is a 
strong incentive to continue using those products due to the additional 
costs associated with varying the protein source. As more manufacturers 
see their competition converting to using cheaper and subsidized 
imported milk protein products, they will face extreme pressures to 
convert to these artificially discounted products in order to remain 
competitive. This will lead to the increasing development of processes 
that rely on MPC and casein, not because domestic sources of milk 
protein would not suffice; but rather because different systems are 
required to process different protein delivery forms.
    Despite this tendency, the root cause of this increasing trend away 
from milk proteins produced in the U.S. is not the discovery of new 
products that can only be made with imported milk protein products. 
Rather, the underlying cause is the comparative affordability of these 
subsidized imported products as compared to domestic alternatives. It 
is the choice to avoid the appropriately priced domestic protein 
products that is spurring the majority of the decisions to convert to 
MPC/casein, which in turn may then lead to the development of 
additional uses tailored to these products.
    The National Milk Producers Federation does not dispute that a 
limited number of products do now require the specific properties of 
MPC-high or casein. The heavy subsidization of those products and the 
development of new uses of those products to take advantage of a loop-
hole in the U.S. tariff system, however, are what are at issue. 
Moreover, the need for the majority of these products is at best 
unclear and more likely heavily dependent on artificially low prices. 
The importation of these products is clearly a ``windfall'' to 
processors that is directly undermining U.S. laws that protect U.S. 
dairy producers' income.
    Despite what importers and advocates of these products may say, the 
reality of the situation is that the world markets for milk proteins, 
as well as other milk products, are extremely distorted. Those who 
encourage one-way free trade and argue that U.S. producers are 
uncompetitive because of our domestic support failed to note that other 
countries are competitive solely because of trade distorting programs.
    Second, substitutability is not an issue. The large demand for milk 
proteins that are currently being imported is perfectly sustainable 
using U.S. skim milk. The bulk of the demand for these products arises 
from their artificial affordability, not from their special properties. 
Moreover, in the select instances where manufacturers may feel that 
their product does indeed demand certain properties supplied by MPC-
high or casein, the U.S. market is capable of meeting this need, 
provided the manufacturers pay the fair market price for the products. 
All imported proteins are either already being produced in the United 
States or can be produced in a fairly rapid matter.
U.S. Milk Protein Imports are Displacing Domestically-Produced Milk
        Proteins
    Imported milk protein products are used largely in the production 
of dairy foods, primarily cheese, as well as other food products. Their 
importation therefore displaces domestically-produced milk protein, 
which is manufactured into nonfat dry milk, or skim milk powder, the 
traditional product into which excess skim milk solids are manufactured 
in the U.S. dairy industry, and sold in that form to the Commodity 
Credit Corporation (CCC) under the dairy price support program's 
standing offer to purchase.
    The data in Figure 3, above, show that milk protein imports into 
the United States are growing in the long run, as shown by the 
explosive 59% growth in the amount of proteins coming into the United 
States in the form of MPC, casein and caseinates between 1993 and 2004. 
Growth in the level of total MPC, casein and caseinates imports between 
1993 and 2004 is even higher at 67%. The data above also show that milk 
protein imports are growing not just in absolute terms but also as a 
portion of the protein supply in the large and growing U.S. dairy 
industry. Imported milk proteins have grown from approximately 50 
percent to about 60 percent of the milk proteins in domestically-
produced nonfat dry milk. This growth in milk protein imports, in both 
an absolute and a relative sense, is having increasingly negative 
impacts on the domestic industry.
    Figure 4, on the following page, compares the growth in the volume 
of milk protein imports since 1993 with the level of milk proteins 
displaced in the domestic market, as measured by purchases of nonfat 
dry milk by the Commodity Credit Corporation under the dairy price 
support program. To facilitate the comparison, milk protein import 
growth is expressed in terms of the equivalent volumes of nonfat dry 
milk that would supply the same volumes and types of milk protein as 
are contained in imported milk protein products.
    CCC purchases were small at the beginning of this period but have 
since grown at a rate that closely matches the rate of milk protein 
import growth. The only year which deviates somewhat from this pattern 
is 2002, when supplies temporarily outstripped consumption, which was 
dampened by the recession and the events of 9/11. As shown, the basic 
correlation has reestablished itself subsequently. Additionally, more 
recently in 2005, the relationship again experiences a bit of an 
anomaly as import levels continue to climb while CCC purchases are 
minimal due to the current extremely tight world supply of dairy 
proteins which has allowed for the export of sizable amounts of nonfat 
dry milk from the U.S.
    A word of clarification should be interjected at this point, 
regarding the issue of displacement of domestically-produced milk 
proteins by imports. In discussions of this issue, it is sometimes 
claimed that imported milk protein products, for example casein, do not 
substitute for domestic milk protein products such as nonfat dry milk 
because the two products do not have the same physical properties in 
food processing applications. As a result, nonfat dry milk cannot be 
directly substituted for casein in a number of applications. However, 
this type of consideration deals with the issue of physical 
substitutability, not economic substitution.
    In this sense, milk proteins imported in all product forms displace 
domestically-produced milk proteins, which are commonly manufactured 
into nonfat dry milk when displaced. U.S. milk proteins could be, and 
would be manufactured into any and all forms for which domestic uses 
exist, including all products currently imported, if imported milk 
proteins did not benefit from subsidies which reduce their prices or if 
U.S. mil proteins were able to receive corresponding subsidies to match 
imported protein prices.
U.S. Milk Protein Imports Have Seriously Eroded U.S. Dairy Farm Prices 
        and Income
    The impact of import replacement in the U.S. milk proteins market 
is negative and substantial for U.S. dairy farmers. It creates excess 
supply of U.S. nonfat milk solids and depresses domestic prices of 
dairy products that are affected by the supply and demand for milk 
proteins and nonfat milk solids, primarily nonfat dry milk. This, in 
turn, depresses prices for milk received by farmers in the United 
States.
    By way of explanation: In the United States, most dairy farmers are 
paid for the milk they produce through the market regulatory mechanism 
of marketing orders, operated either by the federal government or by 
individual states. Approximately 70 percent of all milk produced is 
normally marketed under ten federal milk marketing orders covering 
specific geographical areas. Under a federal milk marketing order, 
farmers are paid a weighted-average, or ``blend'' price based upon the 
proportionate use of the milk that supplies the order area in different 
dairy products. Separate use classes, and corresponding separate 
prices, are utilized to reflect milk used to produce fluid milk 
products (Class I); soft manufactured products such as yogurt, cottage 
cheese, ice cream and creams (Class II); hard cheese and whey (Class 
III); and butter and nonfat dry milk powder (Class IV).
    Minimum prices that milk buyers must pay under federal milk 
marketing orders for milk used to produce these different product 
classes are determined monthly using formulas that incorporate reported 
prices for Class III and Class IV products (cheese, whey, butter and 
nonfat dry milk), as well as milk yields and processing costs 
reflective of producing those products. In any particular month, prices 
for Class II, Class III and Class IV milk are the same in all federal 
milk marketing orders, while prices for Class I milk vary 
geographically based on transportation costs, milk supply and milk 
consumption considerations. The Class I price for a month is 
essentially the higher of the Class III and Class IV prices during a 
period preceding the month plus a fixed, geographically-specific 
``Class I differential.'' The Class II price for the month is 
essentially the Class IV price during a period preceding the month plus 
$.70 per hundred pounds of milk.
    Several states, notably California, maintain state marketing orders 
that function in a manner similar to federal orders. Approximately 20 
percent of the nation's milk is priced under state orders. Farmers 
marketing the small remaining portion of milk that is not regulated and 
priced under federal or state milk marketing orders nevertheless 
receive prices that are closely correlated with marketing order prices 
because market forces act to ensure that prices cannot fall far out of 
geographic alignment. Therefore, all U.S. dairy farmers are paid prices 
that are directly determined by prices for cheese, whey, butter and 
nonfat dry milk in the U.S. market. The prices for these four products 
are, in turn, determined by the forces of supply and demand for those 
products and are directly affected by imported dairy products.
    Although the dairy price support program maintains a certain 
minimum price level for these products in the marketplace, that level 
of support is freely variable through regulatory action in the case of 
nonfat dry milk, for which markets are most directly affected by 
imported milk protein products. The Secretary of Agriculture has the 
authority to adjust the CCC purchase prices for butter and nonfat dry 
milk, as long as, together, the two prices are equivalent, on a milk 
basis, to the statutorily-established price support level. During 
periods when one of these products is in surplus but the other is not, 
prices of the product in surplus fall to the CCC purchase price level 
and the CCC purchases quantities of the product, while prices of the 
other product are maintained by market forces above the support level. 
When purchases of the surplus commodity are excessive during such 
periods of ``component surplus,'' the Secretary of Agriculture has 
sometimes acted to reduce the CCC purchase price of that commodity and 
increased the CCC purchase price of the other product that is not in 
surplus. Due to the structure of the U.S. milk pricing system, just 
described, these ``butter-powder tilts'', as they are termed, result in 
reduced prices and incomes for dairy farmers.
    As part of its 2004 report entitled the Conditions of Competition 
for Milk Protein Products in the U.S. Market, the International Trade 
Commission (ITC) studied just such an occurrence. According to the ITC, 
MPC and casein imports ``contributed about 35 percent to the growth in 
CCC stocks during 1996-2002.'' (pages 9-3, 9-15). In response to a 
buildup in CCC purchases and inventories of nonfat dry milk as a result 
of this import replacement in the domestic milk proteins market, the 
former Secretary of Agriculture made two ``tilts'' over the course of a 
year and half. On May 31, 2001, the Secretary announced a reduction in 
the CCC purchase price for nonfat dry milk, from $1.0032 per pound to 
$0.90 per pound, and on November 15, 2002, the Secretary announced a 
further reduction to $0.80 per pound. The report's findings supported 
the linkage between CCC stock levels and the tilt measures, stating 
that ``according to USDA officials, tilt adjustments were made in 
response to growth in CCC stocks and the mounting purchase and storage 
costs to the Federal budget.'' (page 9-12).
    Unfortunately, due to lack of documentation at USDA concerning the 
precise criteria used to determine whether and by how much the tilts 
should be made, the ITC was unable to state with certainty that the 
heightened CCC stock levels due to imports had led to the decision to 
implement the two tilts (page 9-17). Given the ITC's findings on each 
matter individually, however, the relationship between these two events 
is quite clear.
    Figure 5, below, shows the results of a simulation analysis of the 
intermediate-term impact of these two butter-powder tilts on U.S. dairy 
producer prices and incomes. This analysis simulates dairy product 
prices, and the corresponding milk prices and farm incomes, that would 
have occurred had the tilts not taken place, and compares those with 
actual prices and incomes. Given the relatively short time horizon, it 
does not model the impacts of changes in supply and demand in response 
to the estimated price changes.
    As shown, we estimate that these two tilts reduced U.S. dairy farm 
incomes by about two and one-quarter of a billion dollars and largely 
set the stage for the prolonged period of low milk prices throughout 
2002 and the first half of 2003, when milk prices set new 25-lows for 
months at a stretch.
    A particularly devastating aspect of such component surplus-induced 
price erosion is that supply cannot adjust in a straightforward 
fashion, as it can when an entire commodity is in surplus. Milk is 
produced with the two basic components, milkfat and nonfat milk solids, 
in relative proportions that do not vary much at all over time and 
under varying price scenarios. When the relative supply-demand 
situation for the two dairy components diverge over time, as they are 
currently doing in response to the growth in milk protein imports, 
there ensues a situation of growing price instability and market 
disruption that is not sustainable.
U.S. Milk Protein Imports Will Continue to Erode U.S. Dairy Farm Prices 
        and Income
    Based on simple time series analysis, which aggregates all causes 
of change in U.S. milk protein imports, including price trends, we 
estimate that annual imports of MPC and casein will rise to the 
equivalent of 1.3 billion pounds of nonfat dry milk by the year 2012, 
from a level of approximately 950 million pounds in 2004. This 
projected growth in milk protein imports over the next eight years is 
equivalent to more than 300 million pounds of domestically-produced 
nonfat dry milk, or 3.8 billion pounds of raw milk. This is over and 
above the ``base levels'' of displacement of production by milk protein 
imports in 2004, which is equivalent to 11.3 billion pounds of domestic 
milk production, representing the production of almost 600,000 cows of 
2004 average productivity and more than 4,400 dairy farms of average 
size in 2004.
    This continued growth in U.S. milk protein imports will likely 
impose significant pressure on the price support program, following the 
current period of unusually high international prices for nonfat dry 
milk, and ultimately lead to resumption of significant quantities of 
CCC purchases that would have the potential of rendering the price 
support program unmanageable. We have serious concerns that the dairy 
industry's cornerstone safety net policy, the dairy price support 
program, cannot remain stable and viable if burdened with removals of 
an additional 300 million pounds of nonfat dry milk per year. At 
current CCC prices, such additional purchases would cost the U.S. 
government about $250 million per year.
    Using a simple economic model that takes into account the 
adjustments in domestic milk supply in response to price changes, we 
estimate that this projected growth in U.S. imports of milk protein 
products will further erode dairy farm prices and lead to a cumulative 
loss of U.S. dairy farm income of about $2.7 billion dollars between 
2005 and 2012.
In Closing
    The National Milk Producers Federation appreciates the opportunity 
to present its views to the House Ways and Means Committee with respect 
to the need for H.R. 521, the Milk Import Tariff Equity Act, in order 
to address the loophole in our tariff structure that imported milk 
protein products are currently exploiting. H.R. 521 would create 
tariff-rate quotas for these products, allowing a controlled amount to 
enter each year, but imposing a ceiling of sorts on the total quantity 
permitted to impact our domestic market--identical to the way the vast 
majority of traditional dairy products are dealt with in order not to 
undermine the U.S. dairy price support program and to ensure the health 
of the U.S. dairy industry.

                                 <F-dash>

                    [By permission of the Chairman:]

                                                New Zealand Embassy
                                               Washington, DC 20008
                                                  September 1, 2005
Congressman E. Clay Shaw Jr
Chairman
Subcommittee on Trade
U.S. House of Representatives

Dear Congressman Shaw

    The New Zealand Government notes that HR521, a bill to impose 
tariff rate quotas on certain casein, caseinates and milk protein 
concentrates, has been proposed for inclusion in this year's 
Miscellaneous Tariff Bill. New Zealand is a significant supplier of 
milk protein concentrates, caseinates and casein to the United States 
and the creation of a tariff quota for these products would be 
detrimental to New Zealand's trading interests.
    The current access regime reflects an overall balanced outcome of 
rights and obligations, as a result of negotiation and compromise by 
all WTO members during the Uruguay Round. It would be regrettable to 
upset this balance at a time when the United States and New Zealand 
(and other WTO members) are engaged in negotiating comprehensive and 
ambitious reforms to the global agricultural trading system in the Doha 
Round, to the benefit of both our agriculture industries.
    Additionally, the May 2004 report of the U.S. International Trade 
Commission ``Conditions of Competition for Milk Protein Products in the 
U.S. Market'' showed that imports of milk protein concentrates did not 
impact on domestic farm-level prices for milk proteins and that there 
was only minimal impact on domestic milk protein production.
    We therefore respectfully ask that HR521 not be included in the 
Miscellaneous Tariff Bill. My staff and I are available to provide 
further information or respond to any questions members of your 
committee may have on this issue.
                                                          John Wood
                                          Ambassador of New Zealand

                                 <F-dash>

                                               Novartis Corporation
                                               Washington, DC 20004
                                                    August 30, 2005
The Honorable E. Clay Shaw, Jr.
Chairman, Subcommittee on Trade
Ways and Means Committee
U.S. House of Representatives
1104 Longworth House Office Building
Washington, D.C. 20515-6354

Dear Mr. Chairman:

    On behalf of Novartis Nutrition Corporation (NNC), I am writing to 
urge your Subcommittee on Trade to oppose efforts to include H.R. 521, 
the ``Milk Import Tariff Equity Act,'' in the Miscellaneous Tariff 
Bill. We strongly object to H.R. 521 because it would impose a new and 
completely unjustified tariff-rate quota regime on imports of certain 
milk proteins, caseins and caseinate products, an action that would 
have very serious and harmful consequences for our company, and the 
patients we serve with our medical nutrition products. We urge the 
immediate deletion of this measure from the Miscellaneous Tariff Bill, 
and we will oppose its provisions if introduced in any other form.
    The arguments used to justify this legislation in the past have 
been shown to be invalid. A May 2004 U.S. International Trade 
Commission study (Investigation 332-453, Conditions of Competition for 
Milk Protein Products in the U.S. Market), in response to a request by 
the Senate Finance Committee, concluded after a year-long review, that 
imports of milk protein concentrates, caseins and caseinates have had 
no direct impact on the farm milk prices paid to U.S. producers. 
Moreover, this bill is being proposed at a time when U.S. dairy 
producers are receiving some of the highest prices ever for their milk.
    We believe legislation imposing tariff-rate quotas would jeopardize 
the supply of, and substantially increase costs for, imported milk 
protein concentrates (MPCs), casein, and caseinates. For these reasons, 
Novartis has consistently articulated opposition to the substance of 
such legislation, and we have vigorously questioned its justification. 
Congress did not pass similar legislative efforts in the past, and H.R. 
521's inclusion in the Miscellaneous Tariff Bill, or any other 
legislation, is inappropriate.
    Novartis Nutrition Corporation is a division of Novartis 
Pharmaceutical Corporation, headquartered in Basel, Switzerland. St. 
Louis Park, MN is the North American Headquarters of the division and 
home to manufacturing, warehouse operations, and corporate offices. In 
addition, our Minnesota headquarters serves as our Global Research and 
Development operations for Nutrition, In all, we employ over 750 people 
at this location. NNC manufactures a variety of medical enteral 
nutrition products that can be tube-fed or taken as oral supplements, 
most designed as part of overall treatment plans in a variety of 
disease states, including: diabetes, renal, pulmonary, and cancer 
treatments. We manufacture products for adult and pediatric use.
    An essential component of our nutritional products is protein. The 
only dairy protein with the necessary functional characteristics for 
use in enteral formulas is caseinate. Other sources of dairy protein, 
such as fluid milk or nonfat dry milk, are not appropriate for this 
use. The following points explain the key reasons for the use of 
caseinate in our nutritional products:

    1.  Thermal process stability: Caseinates are stable under the 
thermal process conditions necessary to render a liquid product 
commercially stable. Egg white protein would coagulate under these 
conditions, resulting in a product that would not be deliverable via a 
feeding tube.
    2.  Low viscosity: Caseinates provide a low viscosity liquid 
product, which is essential when the product is delivered using a small 
diameter feeding tube. It may be possible to create a liquid using 
other high quality proteins, such as those derived from soy or meat; 
however, the resulting liquid would be of too high a viscosity to 
permit flow through feeding tubes.
    3.  Emulsion stability: Caseinates are excellent stabilizers of 
liquid complete nutrition products. The use of meat proteins and 
certain soy proteins in liquid tube feedings will, over time, result in 
the oil separating from the bulk phase, resulting in a product that 
appears spoiled, or defective.
    4.  Allergenicity and tolerance: Caseinates are lactose free. Fluid 
milk or nonfat dry milk, a domestic source of dairy protein, contains 
lactose, a milk sugar to which certain individuals are intolerant. In 
addition, other individuals are allergic to products containing egg. In 
other cases, individuals cannot consume meat products for religious 
reasons.

    To our knowledge, suitable caseinates are either not manufactured 
in the United States, or manufactured in such low quantities that 
domestic production would not offset the negative impact of a tariff-
rate quota. We have no alternative source of supply in the economic 
quantities necessary to make our nutritional products.
    H.R. 521 could result in cost increases to NNC of at least $5.1 
million. The narrowing and increased cost of supply ingredients would 
result in increased production costs that would have to be absorbed 
internally and/or passed on to consumers and patients--increasing the 
costs of essential therapies for individuals requiring medical 
nutrition interventions.
    A tariff-rate quota applied to caseinates and MPCs, as provided in 
H.R. 521, would cause significant and unnecessary economic hardship to 
the medical nutrition industry and the patients who benefit from its 
life-saving therapies. We will either have to absorb the increased 
costs, pass them on to customers and patients, and/or engage in a 
lengthy process to reformulate a significant number of products in a 
search for alternative protein sources. This will cost millions of 
dollars and will drain resources away from developing new, innovative 
nutrition therapies. Even if we can succeed in finding suitable 
alternative ingredients, it is very unlikely that these alternative 
sources of protein will be domestically produced dairy products such as 
nonfat dry milk.
    We appreciate your consideration of this important and very urgent 
matter. If you have any questions or need additional information, 
please contact me in our D.C. office.
                                                       Tracy Haller
                 Executive Director, International & Public Affairs

                                 <F-dash>

                                                         RetireSafe
                                                   Oakton, VA 22124
                                                    August 29, 2005
The Honorable E. Clay Shaw, Jr.
Chairman, Subcommittee on Trade
Committee on Ways and Means
U.S. House of Representatives
1104 Longworth House Office Building
Washington, DC 20515-6354

Dear Mr. Chairman:

    On behalf of RetireSafe's 367,000 senior citizen supporters across 
America, including more than 25,000 in Florida, we strongly urge your 
Subcommittee on Trade to reject efforts to include H.R. 521 
(controversial legislation to impose new tariff-rate quotas on imported 
milk protein concentrate (MPC), casein, and caseinates) in the 
Miscellaneous Tariff Bill. H.R. 521 would especially harm older 
Americans, and RetireSafe will continue to oppose any measure that 
contains its harmful provisions.
    Seniors are living longer, healthier lives for many reasons, 
including today's availability and affordability of critical 
nutritional products that utilize imported MPC, casein, and caseinate. 
Supporters of H.R. 521 would pile tariffs on these essential imported 
ingredients, in a punitive effort to price their use out of the market, 
even though there is no good substitute for them. Non-fat dry milk has 
never been a feasible replacement for MPC, casein, or caseinates in 
these popular and nutritional foods and drinks. The high lactose 
content, as well as the instability of the protein content, eliminates 
the possibility that non-fat dry milk could be used instead of the 
imported milk proteins. Thus, not only would the tariffs contained in 
H.R. 521 impose a ``food tax'' on consumers, punishing seniors on fixed 
incomes the most of all, it would also spell the demise of key 
nutritional products that the elderly depend on daily.
    From the hundreds of common grocery items that make use of these 
irreplaceable milk protein imports to provide sought-after nutrient 
levels, consistency, and good taste, to senior-specific products like 
Ensure, and more specialized, life-saving medical drinks used in 
hospitals and nursing homes, the very ingredients H.R. 521 would make 
unavailable or unaffordable are absolutely critical to America's senior 
citizens.
    For these reasons, RetireSafe has consistently opposed H.R. 521 and 
other similar measures. Any vote regarding any legislation containing 
the controversial provisions of H.R. 521 will be considered a ``Key 
Vote'' by RetireSafe and the senior-supporters we represent, and any 
such vote will be heavily weighted in any RetireSafe ranking of 
Congress. Again, we strongly urge you, and the Subcommittee on Trade 
which you Chair, to reject the ill-advised effort to include H.R. 521 
in the Miscellaneous Tariff Bill.
                                                  Charles G. Hardin
                                                          President

                                 <F-dash>

                         U.S. Coalition for Nutritional Ingredients
                                               Washington DC, 20005
                                                  September 2, 2005
Chairman E. Clay Shaw, Jr.
Subcommittee on Trade
Committee on Ways and Means
U.S. House of Representatives
1104 Longworth House Office Building
Washington, DC 20515-6354

Dear Mr. Chairman:

    The U.S. Coalition for Nutritional Ingredients (the ``Coalition'') 
is a group of more than 40 taxpayer, consumer and senior citizen 
organizations, as well as trade associations and food companies that 
strongly oppose H.R. 521, the Milk Import Tariff Equity Act. This 
controversial legislation attempts to impose tariff-rate quotas (TRQs) 
on imported milk protein concentrate (MPC), casein and caseinates, 
which would lead to increased costs on a wide range of specialized 
consumer products.
    The Coalition urges you to reject the inclusion of H.R. 521 in this 
year's miscellaneous tariff bill. This trade vehicle is traditionally 
reserved for non-controversial bills. In the case of H.R. 521, the 
economic and policy issues are highly divisive and strongly contended. 
For example, enactment of H.R. 521 would create a regressive food tax, 
and would be a blatant violation of World Trade Organization (WTO) 
rules and U.S. international trade obligations. For these and other 
substantive reasons, the Coalition would vigorously oppose any 
legislative vehicle incorporating H.R. 521, including the miscellaneous 
trade bill, as well as any expedited process for consideration of such 
a vehicle. Therefore, we urge the Subcommittee on Trade to not include 
H.R. 521 in the miscellaneous tariff bill.
    MPC, casein and caseinates are technologically sophisticated 
ingredients that are tailored to meet manufacturers' requirements. 
Unlike nonfat dry milk (NFDM) which contains lactose and low and 
varying levels of protein, MPC, casein and caseinate can be used in a 
wide range of specialized products to meet the market demand for 
products that contain little or no lactose, and have high and 
consistent levels of protein. MPC, casein and caseinates are not 
interchangeable with NFDM; they are different products, with distinct 
characteristics and unique applications.
    Currently, these proteins enter the U.S. with minimal duties and 
are important ingredients in a variety of popular consumer goods and 
specialty foods that Americans enjoy each and every day including: 
processed cheese products, coffee creamers, convenience foods, frozen 
dinners, geriatric drinks, hypoallergenic infant formulas, sports bars, 
weight-loss beverages and nutritional drinks. These proteins are also 
used in many medical, pharmaceutical, cosmetic, animal feed and 
industrial products. Adding new tariff barriers would increase costs to 
U.S. users of these dairy ingredients. With the domestic market for 
these proteins significantly larger than domestic production, 
manufacturers would have no choice but to import the ingredients, pay 
the higher price, and pass the increased cost onto consumers.
H.R. 521 is Highly Controversial
    This issue of raising tariffs on milk protein ingredients has been 
before Congress for many years and has caused much heated debate on 
Capitol Hill. To obtain an independent analysis of the situation, the 
Senate Finance Chairman requested an International Trade Commission 
(ITC) investigation into the economics of imported milk proteins over 
the period of 1998 to 2002. In May 2004, the ITC released a report on 
its year-long research. This document is the most exhaustive, 
authoritative and objective study of the matter. It supports most of 
the Coalition's arguments and sets forth no basis for new tariffs on 
imported dairy proteins. Despite the ITC's findings, supporters of the 
TRQ continue to urge legislators to enact H.R. 521. Simply put, H.R. 
521 is highly controversial and including this bill in the 
miscellaneous tariff bill could jeopardize the expedited process that 
has traditionally benefited this legislation.
Foreign Government Practices Are Not the Culprit
    H.R. 521 supporters maintain that foreign government practices and 
trade policies are the major factor driving milk protein imports. 
Specifically, they argue that large subsidies given to European Union 
(EU) producers hinder the ability for U.S. producers to compete with 
imports and preclude the development of a U.S. casein, caseinates and 
MPC industry.
    In its report the ITC rejects the basic premise of this argument in 
noting that ``if price leadership exists in the U.S. MPC market, it is 
exercised by the Oceania countries.'' \1\ Further, the ITC report 
states that due to ``dairy policy changes in the EU, it is unlikely 
that the conditions that contributed to the increase in imports from 
1998-2000 will be repeated in the future.'' \2\ In fact, the most 
recent data backs up the ITC's analysis, as imports of low protein 
``blended'' MPC from the EU have disappeared. Currently, 90% of the 
imported milk proteins come from Australia and New Zealand, where there 
is no government intervention in the dairy markets. Moreover, the vast 
majority of these imports contain at least 70 percent protein, and as 
such are not substitutes for NFDM, while what MPC is now being imported 
from the EU is product containing 80 percent or more protein that does 
not receive export subsidies. Furthermore, what production aid that did 
exist for casein in the EU has been virtually eliminated since 2003 
rendering that program irrelevant.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \1\ Conditions of Competition for Milk Proteins in the U.S. Market, 
Investigation No. 332-453, USITC Publication 3692, May 2004, 9-4
    \2\ Conditions of Competition for Milk Protein Products in the U.S. 
Market, Investigation No. 332-453, USITC Publication 3692, May 2004, 
xxix
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Additionally, U.S. MPC commercial production has begun in Portales, 
New Mexico without a U.S. subsidy; dispelling any idea that the U.S. 
producers are not able to compete against imports. The plant in 
Portales is profitably responding to the market demand for MPC and is 
running at full capacity. As a result of its success, a second plant is 
being developed in Arizona to meet market demand, and when both plants 
are operational (not to mention the prospect of additional capacity) 
nearly half of U.S. domestic demand will be met by U.S. domestic 
production--a dramatic change from just over 2 years ago.
There is no U.S. Trade Law ``Loophole``
    TRQ supporters argue that imports of milk protein are circumventing 
U.S. trade laws by entering through a ``loophole'' in the U.S. tariff 
schedule. However, the ITC specifically refuted the ``loophole'' 
argument noting that both Congress and the President had carefully 
considered the tariff treatment of casein, caseinates and MPCs. Imports 
of these products have never been subject to Section 22 quotas 
following formal investigations. In 1984, long before the Uruguay Round 
negotiations, Congress created specific tariff lines to account for 
MPCs, that were not subject to quota. Furthermore, in 2003, U.S. 
Customs found that imported MPCs, casein and caseinates did not 
circumvent nonfat dry milk TRQs, and were correctly classified under 
non-quota provisions.
H.R. 521 Violates U.S. Trade Commitments
    Increasing tariffs on MPC, casein and caseinates would violate our 
WTO obligations and the U.S. Free Trade Agreement with Australia. In 
these trade pacts, the U.S. has agreed to maintain a certain level of 
duties. If the U.S. unilaterally decides to raise its bound tariffs, 
Australia and other countries supplying these dairy proteins to the 
U.S. market must be compensated or they have the right to retaliate by 
imposing trade sanctions on U.S. exports.
    In addition to the economic effects of compensation and/or 
retaliation, the U.S. would lose its credibility to negotiate reduced 
trade barriers in the WTO Doha Development Agenda. As a leader in 
advocating free trade, it would be fundamentally inconsistent for the 
U.S. to erect any new trade barriers. Supporting H.R. 521 is contrary 
to U.S. trade principles and would undermine our mission to liberalize 
trade in the WTO Doha Round and future trade agreements.
Milk Protein Imports Do Not Affect Domestic Milk Prices
    Proponents of the TRQ argue that U.S. imports of MPC, casein and 
caseinates depress milk prices. However, the U.S. Department of 
Agriculture 2004 all-milk price paid to farmers was $16.04 per 
hundredweight (cwt), the highest ever, while the average has been 
$13.57 cwt for the last ten years. The forecasts for 2005 peg the all-
milk price as the third highest on record.
     The 2004 ITC report also found that there was no direct 
relationship between imports of milk proteins and farm milk prices over 
the study period. The report stated that ``[t]he data do not show a 
clear and direct relationship between imports of milk protein products 
and the all-milk price in all years.'' \3\ The report also noted that 
the ITC reviewed a broad range of studies by prominent dairy economists 
and, ``[e]ven though these studies differed in terms of modeling 
approaches, commodity coverage, and base year, they generally found 
that imports of milk protein products have had little impact on farm-
level prices in the U.S. market.'' \4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \3\ Ibid, 9-4
    \4\ Ibid, 9-23
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Milk Protein Imports Do Not Displace Domestic Milk Production
    TRQ supporters have made the argument that imports of casein, 
caseinate and MPC have displaced domestically produced milk proteins, 
principally NFDM, in the U.S. marketplace. However, the U.S. domestic 
market is extremely robust for NFDM notwithstanding the imports. The 
most recent data, as reported by the U.S. Dairy Export Council, 
indicates that NFDM prices in June 2005 averaged 16% higher than the 
Commodity Credit Corporation (CCC) purchase support price. 
Additionally, the CCC has not bought NFDM for 35 weeks. Further, the 
ITC report concluded that imports of casein, caseinate and MPC may have 
substituted for only 1.27 percent of U.S. milk protein production from 
1998-2002.
    In sum, there are many substantive reasons to reject H.R. 521. The 
bill is a poster child for trade protectionism; is anti-consumer; 
violates U.S. trade agreements and is damaging to U.S. trade objectives 
in the current WTO Round. For all these reasons we urge the Trade 
Subcommittee to omit H.R. 521 from the miscellaneous tariff bill.
    On behalf of the following consumer organizations, associations and 
food companies and employees, we appreciate your consideration of our 
views.
                                        American Bakers Association
                                 American Feed Industry Association
                                           Americans for Tax Reform
                                     American Frozen Food Institute
                                            American Meat Institute
                                       Arla Foods Ingredients, Inc.
                                                BL Ingredients, LLC
                                                ConAgra Foods, Inc.
                      Council for Citizens Against Government Waste
                     Committee to Assure the Availability of Casein
                                          Consumers for World Trade
                                        Davisco Foods International
                                                 Dean Foods Company
                               DMV International Nutritionals, Inc.
                                          Erie Foods, International
                                                      Euro Proteins
                                               Fonterra (USA), Inc.
                                    Food Distributors International
                                          Food Products Association
                                                 General Mills Inc.
                                          Glanbia Ingredients, Inc.
                                   Grocery Manufacturers of America
                                              Hershey Foods Company
                                                 H.J. Heinz Company
                                                          IDB, Inc.
                              International Dairy Foods Association
                                                         Kerry Inc.
                                           Kraft Foods Global, Inc.
                                            Lactalis/Sorrento, Inc.
                                                 Lactoprot USA, Inc
                                                    Masterfoods USA
                                 National Confectioners Association
                                           National Taxpayers Union
                                    National Frozen Pizza Institute
                                                        Nestle, USA
                                                 Novartis Nutrition
                                                 Pet Food Institute
                                                     RetireSafe.org
                                                Sargento Foods Inc.
                                                    Slim-Fast Foods
                                           The Schwann Food Company
                                            Saputo Cheese USA, Inc.
                                              Schreiber Foods, Inc.
                                             Snack Food Association

                                 <F-dash>

                                            Davis, California 95617
                                                    August 31, 2005
Congressman E. Clay Shaw
Chairman
Subcommittee on Trade
Committee on Ways and Means
U.S. House of Representatives

Dear Congressman Shaw,

    I am writing to urge your support for including H.R. 915 Cultural 
Conservation of the Crossroads of Civilization Act (``A bill to 
authorize the President to take certain actions to protect 
archaeological or ethnological materials of Afghanistan'') in the 
Miscellaneous Tariffs bill. This Act grants authority to the President 
to impose emergency import restrictions to prevent the import into the 
United States of antiquities and other cultural materials that have 
been illegally removed from Afghan cultural institutions and other 
locations, particularly archaeological sites in Afghanistan.
    This legislation is necessary because archaeological sites are now 
being looted on a large scale in Afghanistan. The heritage of 
Afghanistan has played an important role in the world's historical and 
cultural development. The looting of sites destroys the historical, 
cultural, religious and scientific information that is derived through 
the careful, systematic excavation of sites. When this record is 
destroyed we are all the poorer for it.
    The looting of sites and theft from museums in Afghanistan have 
been significant problems for many years. As with Iraq, the United 
States has undertaken a special relationship with Afghanistan. Concern 
for preservation of the cultural heritage of Afghanistan must be given 
equal consideration.
    Sites are looted of antiquities so that they can be sold ultimately 
to markets in Western Europe and the United States. It is crucial that 
the President be given this authority to prevent the import into the 
United States of looted cultural materials and thereby reduce the 
incentive for theft and destruction of archaeological sites. Enactment 
of this legislation will help the United States to fulfill its 
obligations to the Afghan people and help to enrich our understanding 
of the world's and our own cultural heritage.
            Thank you,
                                                      Muzhdah Aimaq

                                 <F-dash>

                                    American Numismatic Association
                                   Colorado Springs, Colorado 80903
                                                    August 24, 2005
E. Clay Shaw, Jr.
Chairman, Subcommittee on Trade
Committee on Ways & Means
U.S. House of Representatives
1102 Longworth House Office Building
Washington D.C. 20515

Dear Chairman Shaw:

    I am writing on behalf of the American Numismatic Association (ANA) 
to oppose the imposition of import restrictions on coins proposed in 
conjunction with H.R. 915 (the Cultural Conservation of the Crossroads 
of Civilization Act).
    The ANA is a nonprofit, educational organization chartered by the 
United States Congress to promote the study and collection of money and 
related items for research, interpretation and preservation of history 
and culture from ancient times to the present. The ANA has almost 
33,000 active members in the United States and our numbers are growing. 
Many of our members collect Greek coins struck thousands of years ago 
in what is now Afghanistan. Others collect more obscure money that 
circulated in the area, including coins struck by the Mauryan Empire, 
the Kushans, the White Huns, the Turks, the Mongols, and the Savid 
Dynasties.
    Although the ANA supports reasonable efforts to protect Afghan 
collections and archaeological sites, the ANA is concerned that 
application of import restrictions to numismatics, including coins, 
paper money, tokens and medals, will adversely impact the longstanding 
legitimate trade and collecting of any such items. Typically, 
numismatic items do not carry any provenance with them, particularly of 
the sort contemplated by U.S. Customs under the governing statute. 
Thus, a legitimate holder of numismatic material may not be able to 
establish the necessary historical ownership of legally purchased 
numismatics to avoid forfeiture of his or her collection under the 
contemplated import restrictions. Likewise, numismatic items are not 
the type of cultural antiquities that should be included in H.R. 915. 
Coins and other forms of money were often mass produced making them a 
common circulating item of trade and barter rather than the type of 
antiquity intended to be protected by H.R. 915.
    U.S. citizens have enjoyed collecting ancient money since the 
American Revolution (and citizens of the Colonies enjoyed coin 
collecting before the revolution). President John Quincy Adams was a 
serious collector of ancient Greek and Roman coins. Other Presidents 
like Theodore Roosevelt and, more recently, Ronald Reagan and Bill 
Clinton have appreciated owning the type of coinage that would be 
covered under any proposed restrictions. There is no supportable reason 
that could be advanced to impose import restrictions on coins, 
particularly given the harm the imposition of import restrictions would 
cause to legitimate collectors and individuals dealing in such 
numismatic items.
    By providing an exemption for numismatics, we believe that Congress 
can still achieve the goal of protecting ``culturally significant'' 
Afghan antiquities while preserving numismatics as an important 
historical and cultural resource for future generations of Americans. 
On behalf of the ANA and its nearly 33,000 members, I hope that the 
Subcommittee on Trade will exclude numismatics from the import 
restrictions of H.R. 915. Should you have any questions, please do not 
hesitate to contact me.
            Sincerely,
                                              Christopher Cipoletti
                                                 Executive Director

                                 <F-dash>

                                        American Numismatic Society
                                           New York, New York 10038
                                                    August 20, 2005
E. Clay Shaw, Jr.
Chairman
Subcommittee on Trade
Committee on Ways & Means
U.S. House of Representatives
1102 Longworth House Office Building
Washington D.C. 20515

Dear Mr. Chairman:

    We are Trustees of the American Numismatic Society (ANS). The ANS, 
founded in 1858, is arguably the nation's premier numismatic 
institution, and the only one with the unique honor of displaying the 
highlights of its collection at the Federal Reserve Bank of New York. 
We are writing in our individual capacity solely as concerned citizens 
to oppose efforts to impose restrictions on Americans importing coins 
based at least in part on erroneous information contained in the 
subject legislation.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \1\ One of the major predicates for the bill's ``emergency import 
restrictions'' is the claim at finding 16 that, ``100 percent of the 
objects [from the Kabul National Museum] were stolen and vandalized.'' 
However, it has now been reported that most of the important items 
thought to be missing from the Afghan National Museum (including coins) 
have in fact been found in excellent condition.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    In particular, we express deep concern about proposals to shift the 
legal burden of proof to show that a particular coin did not come from 
a country with restrictive cultural property laws onto collectors, 
professional numismatists and institutions holding coins. Such 
proposals seek to deter the entrance of looted materials into the 
numismatic trade, but at the cost of imposing an unfair, unworkable and 
unnecessary burden on those holding coins legitimately. Domestic law 
already bars entry of any coins or other artifacts that are proven to 
be stolen, and there are less intrusive means of encouraging 
preservation of archaeological sites in source countries. These means 
include better policing of archaeological sites, public education 
programs, reasonable regulation of metal detectors, and promulgation 
fair laws that encourage members of the public to report their finds 
with the prospect of an award. In contrast, it is unfair to assume that 
collectors, dealers and institutions holding coins can show their 
provenance when millions of historical coins have been widely traded 
since the Renaissance without any requirement to show their chain of 
ownership.
    A distinctive feature of coinage compared with those of most other 
artifacts explains the reason why it is so difficult to establish a 
coin's origins. Today, a nation issues money for circulation within its 
particular boundaries as a symbol of its jealously guarded 
independence. However, historically, and until quite recently, it was 
commonplace to find a variety of coinages in circulation within any 
given country. Such a situation was indeed the case in the U.S. before 
foreign coins were demonetized in 1857. Given wide circulation 
patterns, determining the provenance of any coin or coins residing in a 
museum or private collection is usually deemed impossible.
    American citizens have enjoyed collecting historical coins since 
before the American Revolution. Serious American collectors of ancient 
and foreign coins have included President John Quincy Adams. Teddy 
Roosevelt is said to have carried an ancient Greek coin as a pocket 
piece, and ancient Greek coins of the sort contemplated for potential 
restriction inspired his ``pet project'' to redesign our own coinage in 
the early part of the 20th Century.
    By providing an exemption for coins, we believe that Congress can 
still achieve the goal of protecting ``culturally significant'' Afghan 
antiquities while preserving numismatics as an important historical and 
cultural resource for future generations of Americans.
            Sincerely,
                                                      John W. Adams
                                                         Boston, MA

                                                   Kenneth L. Edlow
                                                       New York, NY

                                              Prof. Peter P. Gaspar
                                                      St. Louis, MO

                                                   Robert A. Kandel
                                                   New Rochelle, NY

                                                Clifford L. Mishler
                                                           Iola, WI

                                                    Emilio M. Ortiz
                                                       San Juan, PR

                                                Douglass F. Rohrman
                                                     Kenilworth, IL

                                             Stanley DeForest Scott
                                                       New York, NY

                                                   David B. Simpson
                                                        Tenafly, NJ

                                                     Peter K. Tompa
                                                     Washington, DC

                                          Arnold-Peter C. Weiss, MD
                                                     Barrington, RI

                                                John Whitney Walter
                                                       Plandome, NY

                                 <F-dash>

                              American Schools of Oriental Research
                                                  Boston University
                                                   Boston, MA 02215
                                                     19 August 2005
Congressman E. Clay Shaw
Chairman
Subcommittee on Trade
Committee on Ways and Means
U.S. House of Representatives

Dear Congressman Shaw,

    As Executive Director of the premiere North American organization 
conducting archaeological research in the Middle East, I worry deeply 
about any losses in the archaeological record which might take away 
from our understanding of or appreciation for world culture. But I am 
especially concerned about preserving the cultural heritage of 
countries within the arena of our work. The American Schools of 
Oriental Research (ASOR) was founded in 1900 and has been working for 
the past century plus to understand and preserve for posterity the 
material culture of the broader Middle East.
    In order to contribute to the accomplishment of this task, ASOR has 
adopted strict policies governing antiquities from the region (http://
www.asor.org/policy.htm), which are based on international laws and the 
intentional cooperation among countries around the globe. Looting of 
sites and trafficking in artifacts represent a global scourge and we 
want to support any legislation which will stem the rising tide of 
illegal exporting and importing of these irreplaceable material 
cultural remains.
    In the spirit of these principles and goals, I wish to add my voice 
to those urging your support for including H.R. 915 Cultural 
Conservation of the Crossroads of Civilization Act (``A bill to 
authorize the President to take certain actions to protect 
archaeological or ethnological materials of Afghanistan'') in the 
Miscellaneous Tariffs bill. This Act grants authority to the President 
to impose emergency import restrictions to prevent the import into the 
United States of antiquities and other cultural materials that have 
been illegally removed from Afghan cultural institutions and other 
locations, particularly archaeological sites in Afghanistan. This 
legislation is necessary because archaeological sites are now being 
looted on a large scale in Afghanistan. The heritage of Afghanistan has 
played an important role in the world's historical and cultural 
development. The looting of sites destroys the historical, cultural, 
religious and scientific information that is derived through the 
careful, systematic excavation of sites. When this record is destroyed 
we are all the poorer for it. The looting of sites and theft from 
museums in Afghanistan have been significant problems for many years. 
As with Iraq, the United States has undertaken a special relationship 
with Afghanistan. Concern for preservation of the cultural heritage of 
Afghanistan must be given equal consideration.
    Sites are looted of antiquities so that they can be sold ultimately 
to markets in Western Europe and the United States. It is crucial that 
the President be given this authority to prevent the import into the 
United States of looted cultural materials and thereby reduce the 
incentive for theft and destruction of archaeological sites. Enactment 
of this legislation will help the United States to fulfill its 
obligations to the Afghan people and help to enrich our understanding 
of the world's and our own cultural heritage.
            Cordially,
                                            Douglas R. Clark, Ph.D.
                                                 Executive Director

                                 <F-dash>

                                      Ancient Coin Collectors Guild
                                        Gainesville, Missouri 65655
                                                  September 2, 2005
Dear Congressman Shaw;

    The provisions of H.R. 915, as proposed, call for import 
restrictions on antique and ancient collectable coins. The Ancient Coin 
Collectors Guild respectfully opposes any such restrictions. Coins, 
first of all are typically not significant cultural property since they 
were produced in huge numbers and by design were exchanged across 
national and cultural boundaries, both in antiquity as monetary 
instruments and in modern times as collectables. The value of coins as 
cultural ambassadors is tremendous and this fact is well recognized by 
the government of Afghanistan.
    In a letter from the Afghan Embassy to the Ancient Coin Collectors 
Guild, First Secretary Hekmat Karzai wrote: ``Clearly, it is vital for 
Afghanistan to preserve its heritage, yet we also recognize the need to 
teach individuals about the wonderful history of Afghanistan. We have 
to find a balance where both of the objectives are met.'' We absolutely 
agree. The way to achieve this balance is not through import 
restrictions, but through cooperative efforts to identify stolen 
property, enforce existing laws against looting, and return stolen 
items to Afghanistan when they are recovered.
    The ACCG has offered to facilitate the latter by hosting a recovery 
center on the guild website and launching a serious campaign among 
private collectors to recover any items which enter the market 
illegally. Private collectors have been vilified by certain 
ideologically driven members of the archaeological community and much 
publicity has attended the release of Roger Atwood's ``Stealing 
History: Tomb Raiders, Smugglers, and the Looting of the Ancient World. 
There are approximately 50,000 collectors of ancient coins in the 
United States and they simply do not represent an ``evil'' force. This 
point is made clear very well in a recent review of the Atwood book by 
Dr. Alan Walker. Dr. Walker received his training as a Classical 
Archaeologist at the University of Pennsylvania and has the unique 
perspectives of an archaeologist and a professional numismatist. The 
review is published online at http://accg.us/issues/editorials/pro/
walker along with other topical articles. I attach this review here for 
inclusion into the record on this issue because it presents an 
articulate and passionate counterpoint to the arguments typically used 
in condemning the collector market and private ownership of virtually 
any cultural property. Please consider the serious impact on American 
citizens that the proposed import restrictions of H.R. 915 would 
unnecessarily create.
            Respectfully yours,
                                                    Wayne G. Sayles

                                   ----------
    Stealing History. Tomb Raiders, Smugglers, and the Looting of the 
Ancient World. By Roger Atwood. New York, 2004. 337 pp., frontispiece, 
map, 27 photos. Clothbound with dust jacket. (ISBN 0-312-32406-5) 
$25.95
    This is a fascinating, disturbing, well-written and very pernicious 
book that beautifully blends true facts with skewed and, often, very 
biased reasoning to produce a perfect example of the politically 
correct anti-collector, anti-museum and anti-art trade propaganda we 
hear all the time from radical archaeologists and their allies. I think 
this book has received a tremendous amount of hype and will have a 
great deal of influence, so it is important that all collectors, 
especially including coin collectors, know what's in it and know how to 
react when and if they are challenged, or even attacked, because of 
their collecting interests.
    RA's basic focus is on two areas in which he has more than a little 
expertise, Peru, where there has long been widespread looting of tombs 
for objects in precious metal, terracotta figural pottery and fabrics, 
and in Iraq, where there has been widespread looting of virtually 
everything. Extrapolating worldwide, he firmly believes that unless 
something is done, all accessible archaeological sites will be totally 
destroyed by looters by 2050. Needless to say, what he thinks needs to 
be done is to basically ban the collecting, whether by public or 
private institutions or by individuals, of anything without a full 
provenance (and what he means by provenance is a secure chain of 
ownership going back to a licensed excavation; with, in addition, proof 
that the object legally left the country in which it was found--this 
means that lots of material properly excavated and then taken out of 
countries in the 19th century falls under a cloud because, officially, 
it shouldn't have left). In addition, he also insists on making the 
assumption (in common with the radical archaeologists) that anything 
lacking a provenance simply has to have come out of the ground very 
recently. Another brilliant idea he has is to slap ``an indefinite 
worldwide moratorium on trade in undocumented antiquities made of gold, 
silver, and other precious metals'' (p. 244). This, he thinks, would be 
a terrific help in the fight against looting because he believes that 
looters mostly search for gold objects, tossing out or destroying other 
things they find as worthless. Of course, it actually shows how out of 
touch with reality RA is: for thousands of years looters only searched 
for precious objects, which were, in fact, invariably melted down (the 
spectacular Brescello Hoard of 1714, which contained ca. 80,000 late 
Republican aurei--the latest being Crawford 534 of 38 BC--was, after 
the rarities were sorted out and a relatively small number of other 
pieces went off to collectors, almost entirely used to make ducats!). 
While looters may well throw out pots in Peru (they have apparently 
found so many that there is no market), they don't anywhere else, so 
all RA's idea would do is ensure that all precious metal objects would 
be treated as they used to be: melted into convenient and anonymous 
bars.
    Trying to argue in favor of collecting, whether public or private, 
is very difficult because radical archaeologists have done a very good 
job of occupying the moral high ground. To them, and to the vocal 
supporters of the UNESCO accord of 1970, virtually all private 
ownership of cultural objects is an anathema; thus, it is easy for them 
to condemn all their opponents as heartless, greedy, elitists who 
profit from the destruction of mankind's past. Yet there are a lot of 
facts that RA and others of his ilk are very good at selectively 
ignoring: some that they don't like, and some that they think might, 
perhaps, confuse the issue.
    For example, why is it that the looting problem in England is so 
much less drastic than in other areas of the world? The answer probably 
is that the essential fairness of the British system makes it very 
likely that honest finders will report anything they discover because 
they know they will be treated properly. If the state lays claim to 
what they have found they get a very fair reward (usually equal to the 
effective market value), otherwise they get to do whatever they wish 
with their discovery. When builders run into archaeological remains 
during the course of construction projects, rescue excavations are 
carried out, but the builders are given full recompense for the time 
lost. In addition, landowners never have to worry about having their 
lands expropriated by the state for archaeological reasons with minimal 
compensation. As in the U.S., the state can utilize its powers of 
eminent domain, but the owner must receive the land's full market 
value.
    Elsewhere, of course, especially in the major source countries, all 
objects found in the ground, whether on public or private land, ipso 
facto belong to the state, with no right of private ownership 
whatsoever (this is the case in Egypt, among many other places). 
Rewards, if given at all, are arbitrary in nature and usually have no 
relation to the object's national or international market value. 
Farmers or builders who run into archaeological remains can find 
themselves in severe trouble: farming land can be expropriated at an 
arbitrarily low value, especially if the landowner lacks political 
connections (since archaeological remains preclude building or farming 
work, the land's value is automatically downgraded to benefit the 
state), and building work can be held up for so long, with negligible 
compensation, that the contractor and the owner can suffer severe 
financial losses, if not bankruptcy (this does not happen, of course, 
with state projects). Therefore, it often seems better for builders to 
bulldoze ancient remains than to report them. The fact that landowners 
lack ownership rights in objects found within the soil means that there 
is absolutely no incentive for them to protect their land from looters 
(especially since looters occasionally pay the landowners a fee for 
`allowing' them to dig, while reporting ancient remains to the 
authorities can lead to expropriations). It should be immediately 
obvious that draconian confiscatory laws that provide little or no fair 
compensation to honest finders or landowners simply have to be counter-
productive: Italy has had laws like that for generations, and for 
generations people have ignored them because they were so blatantly 
unfair. After all, if a farm or an estate has been owned by a single 
family for generations, why should the state own everything found there 
and not the family?
    Another fact, which is almost entirely ignored by RA and the 
archaeologists, is that people in most of the source countries are 
often rather impoverished. This clearly is a major reason why chance 
finds and looted material are sold rather than turned into the 
government. After all, the average annual per capita income in Peru is 
something like $5000 (but with most rural villagers making less than 
half of this amount) so selling a small object for $20 or $50 or a few 
$100 can make a real difference in the seller's standard of living. 
This is true in virtually every source country (the per capita income 
in Turkey is about $6600--much higher in the big cities and far lower 
in rural districts). Fair and prompt rewards, based on local 
circumstances (i.e., if an object is worth $50,000 on Madison Avenue, 
but the local runner will only pay $400 in Turkey, a reward of $550 
will do perfectly), would end a great deal of destruction. A perfect 
example is the famous Dekadrachm Hoard found near Elmali in Turkey. At 
the time it was found Turkish law apparently provided for rewards, but 
only up to a certain amount of money. No matter what a coin was, the 
maximum the finder could expect was the equivalent of $150--if a group 
of coins was found, the maximum reward, regardless of what they might 
be or how many they were, was $6000. The villagers probably knew this 
and so took their coins to a middleman who paid them, according to 
court papers, the equivalent of $168,000--twenty-eight times what the 
official reward would have been! As everyone knows, this hoard 
ultimately went for $4,000,000 (over 660 times the official reward!!) 
to an American consortium; then, after years of legal wrangling, it 
went back to Turkey. Can you imagine how much the Turks must have paid 
in legal fees? One European numismatist had an hour's talk with Larry 
Kaye, the lead attorney for Turkey, and his assistant, a junior lawyer 
brought along to act as secretary: this probably cost the Turks $500 
for the senior lawyer, $300 for the junior and $20 for the coffee! And 
this case must have consumed thousands of billing hours!
    Obviously, had Elmali been in England, the hoard probably would 
have been reported when it was found, would have been properly 
excavated with exploration of the surrounding area, would have ended up 
in the British Museum, and the proud finder and the land owner would 
have divided a multi-million reward (as actually happened with the 
famous late Roman Hoxne hoard, discovered in 1992). But, someone will 
say, Turkey doesn't have that kind of money. True, but if those 
villagers would have been confident that they'd get a tax-free, legal, 
reward of $175,000 or $200,000, a fraction of what the hoard was worth 
internationally but more than they would have received selling on the 
black market (and a fraction of what Turkey must have paid in American 
legal fees), they'd have turned it in like a shot! Wouldn't this have 
been better for archaeology?
    Villagers are not stupid: if they feel that their own government is 
cheating them or, in fact, stealing from them, they will refuse to turn 
in the things they find. Is this the fault of collectors?
    In fact, isn't it clear that bad laws in the source countries are a 
major factor contributing to why finds go unreported, sites are damaged 
or destroyed, and smuggling is rampant? Why aren't archaeologists 
clamoring for the source countries to change their laws into ones like 
those in England, where finders are treated so fairly that an ever 
increasing amount of often vital archaeological information has been 
gathered thanks to the enthusiastic cooperation of finders and 
landowners (for the astonishingly successful Portable Antiquities 
Scheme, see http://www.finds.org.uk/index.asp)?
    Why, indeed?
    Now we come to the very important part that political correctness 
has to play in the debate over antiquities. As everyone knows it has 
become very fashionable to blame the rich western European powers, and 
by extension the Americans, for most of the world's ills. Among left-
wing academics it is normal to view white males of western European 
origin as being responsible for colonialism, racism, sexism, 
capitalism, class divisions, slavery, all manner of oppressions, and, 
of course, for the pillage of wealth, artifacts and works of art from 
lesser developed and Third World states (it should be noted that ALL 
source countries consider themselves to be part of this general class 
of countries). Thus, suggesting that such countries enact rational laws 
in emulation of Great Britain is a complete non-starter: after all, 
didn't Britain colonize vast areas of the world; weren't treasures from 
Greece, Italy, Turkey, India, China, the Middle East, Nigeria, Egypt, 
et al., taken by British travelers, bought by English lords, or looted 
by British armies, all to adorn museums in Great Britain? In many ways 
the irrational nature of many source country cultural heritage laws is 
simply a reaction against the events of the past: ``Those clever 
Europeans tricked us by taking so many artifacts from our country at a 
time when we couldn't resist them (and, to be honest, at a time when we 
actually didn't want any of it since we thought it was valueless and 
that the foreigners were crazy!), so now we are going to keep 
everything!'' Thus, there are museum store rooms in the source 
countries that are positively jam packed with objects, most of which 
will never be on display and many of which have never been published 
(the store rooms of the archaeological museum of Naples are notorious 
in this regard): if some of this material was sold, after being 
recorded, there would be more than enough money to publish, inventory, 
conserve and display all the rest.
    But why don't all those American and western European 
archaeologists, who are such vehement defenders of ancient sites in the 
source countries, try to get those ineffective laws changed, rather 
than just attacking collectors, museums and dealers in their own 
countries? The simple reason is that it is against their interest to do 
so.
    Any foreign archaeologist who wants to excavate a site or study 
museum material in a source country has to get an official permit from 
that country's ministry of culture to do so. Such permits are not just 
given out to anyone who asks: usually foreign scholars have to go 
through their own country's institute in the source country (like the 
American, Australian, Austrian, British, Canadian, French, German, 
Italian, Swedish, Swiss, etc. institutes in Athens), and they have to 
meet certain standards. One absolutely sure way of NOT getting a permit 
is to say or do something that source country officials don't approve 
of; like, for example, suggesting that the country's laws ought to be 
changed because they don't work and are counter-productive. No American 
archaeologist working, or wanting to work, in Turkey would ever be 
crazy enough to publicly criticize Turkish laws, since that would 
result in a rather rapid career-change once the Turkish authorities 
heard of it (just for fun, if you really want to get a foreign 
archaeologist working in Turkey really upset, try getting him or her to 
express a public opinion on who was responsible for the genocidal 
massacres of the Armenians that took place in Asia Minor in the late 
19th century and during World War I--you may be amazed to find that a 
distinguished professor, highly knowledgable about ancient and medieval 
history, just so happens to know nothing at all about modern history). 
In a well-known case that resulted in an American dealer returning a 
group of Mycenaean jewelry to Greece, it is said that one of the 
reasons why he decided to settle and not fight it out in court is that 
he could get no recognized expert in Mycenaean art to testify on his 
behalf: specifically that Mycenaean objects could be found in many 
places in the eastern Mediterranean (Italy, Cyprus, the Levant and 
Egypt) rather than just in Greece, as the Greek government maintained. 
The obvious reason why they wouldn't is that if they did so they would 
be banned from working in Greece for life.
    The converse is true when an American archaeologist attacks 
collectors, dealers or museums in the U.S. for having material that he 
believes was looted from the source country where he excavates: he 
becomes a hero! This is how it works. The American professor makes an 
impassioned speech, demanding that some item or other be returned to 
Italy from the Metropolitan Museum of Art in New York. This speech gets 
reported in a number of Italian papers, the professor is given an award 
by an Italian heritage group, he gets accolades from Italian 
archaeologists, and his excavation permit is speedily renewed. Back in 
the U.S., the Metropolitan issues a dry statement about legal ownership 
but otherwise ignores our professor (to be sure, they probably won't 
give him a grant). There are no reprisals and his stature will be 
enhanced among his peers. The same thing would be true if he attacks 
American private collectors--he looks good and nothing bad happens to 
him (of course, if a junior faculty member launched a violent diatribe 
against a collector, not knowing that the collector was an alumnus of 
the university in which he teaches and that the collector had up to 
that point intended on donating $50 million for a new gymnasium, our 
young professor's chances for tenure might evaporate--but then he'd 
become a martyr for academic freedom and advance his career).
    Thus, it ought to be obvious that every time one of the radical 
archaeologists attacks collectors and the antiquity trade in America 
and in Western Europe for being the primary cause of looting, he may be 
sincere, but he is neither unbiased nor honest. Rather, by focusing 
solely on the trade, he is, for political reasons, deliberately 
ignoring all the contributing factors caused by unfair and impractical 
laws in the source countries (that would be ``blaming the victim''). 
The really radical even go so far as to object very strongly to rewards 
because they believe a) that since the state claims all objects 
discovered in the ground, it is the duty of every citizen to turn in 
anything found, thus making rewards unnecessary (in some countries even 
picking up something lying on the ground is against the law!); b) that 
basing rewards on market prices is highly improper because if the trade 
itself is illegal in the source country, basing rewards on the prices 
for items that reached foreign markets illicitly is absurd since those 
prices should be ignored; c) that most source countries are relatively 
impoverished so that the payment of rewards would be an unacceptable 
expense; and d) that since looting is clearly the fault of wealthy 
collectors in the West, eliminating the collectors would eliminate any 
need for rewards.
    RA also goes on and on about how much valuable evidence is lost due 
to looting, and how many `priceless' artifacts are lost to the source 
countries. In fact, this is a refrain constantly heard whenever the 
radical archaeologists attack collectors; but is it true? Yes, to some 
extent it is. A complete tomb complex can tell us a tremendous amount 
about the occupant and the society in which he lived, but when it's 
looted, the finders will only be looking for salable objects (which are 
often dispersed so that their connections are lost) and will dig 
through and destroy organic remains and poorly preserved minor items 
that would have told archaeologists a great deal. This, of course, is 
not the case when something is professionally excavated, especially 
when it is published and made available for study (not always the case, 
alas): yet just because it is properly excavated does not necessarily 
mean that it is of any importance. After all, there are many things 
that are found, which are of types we already have, or provide evidence 
for things we already know. For example, one old-time classical 
archaeologist arranged for state-of-the-art water sieving and other 
evidence-retention methods to be used for an excavation of a Greek 
urban site. Aside from tiny fragments of wine and oil vessels, plates, 
cups and cheese strainers, and bones from meat animals such as goats, 
sheep, cattle and swine, among the items found, which otherwise might 
not have been, were grape and olive pits, remains of pulses and 
legumes, and fish bones. But, as he remarked later, ``we already knew 
from ancient literature that the ancient Greeks, like the modern ones, 
ate olives, grapes, beans, lentils, various kinds of meat, fish and 
cheese, drank wine and used oil. Was spending all this money and effort 
to confirm what we already knew worth it?'' The answer is, of course, 
probably not. In fact, while often not mentioned it is no secret that 
vast numbers of unimportant artifacts found in excavations are dumped 
after study (they tend to be used as fill for fully excavated ancient 
wells) since they tell us nothing and there is no need, or space, for 
their storage (for example, if excavators discover a room containing 25 
complete and c. 100 fragmentary storage amphorae, all of the same type, 
they will probably retain all of the complete ones, but only a very 
small number of the fragments--perhaps destined for destructive 
analysis--with the rest being dumped).
    The most extraordinary comment, now made constantly, is that the 
artifacts being looted are ``priceless treasures of inestimable 
value'', not only for the cultural heritage of the country involved, 
but on the market as well. For example, at the time of writing there 
has been a big hoo-haa about a Marine who bought eight cylinder seals 
from a trinket seller in Iraq for $200, and brought them back home with 
him. Curious about what they were, he went to the University Museum in 
Philadelphia and asked about them. Well, the curator there immediately 
recognized them as `priceless treasures' [actually he is reported to 
have said they were worth $25,000!!!] that had to have come from 
ancient Mesopotamia (which was smart of him considering he was the 
curator of Near Eastern Art), and that they had to have been exported 
illegally from Iraq. He immediately contacted the FBI. The Marine was 
shocked and very properly and honestly turned them over to the FBI to 
be repatriated to Iraq (they are now temporarily on display in the 
University Museum; see, http://www.fbi.gov/page2/feb05/
iraqstones022305.htm--you can find images of all eight on the web as 
well). The media went crazy about this wonderful return of these rare 
and exciting and oh so important and valuable objects. But, of course, 
no one has bothered to ask whether they are really valuable or 
important . . . and, sorry to tell you, they're not. They are surely 
real, but all eight, to my untrained eye, are of known types (found in 
museum and private collections all over the world, including Iraq, and 
in dealers' stocks); are of no particular artistic, historic or 
archaeological importance; and, altogether, might be worth $2000 (in a 
major Christie's or Sotheby's antiquity sale none would be worth 
selling as a single lot; in fact, all eight would be sold together). 
What's going on?
    The simple fact is that the VAST majority of objects that the 
radical archaeologists and their media friends term `priceless 
treasures of cultural heritage' are neither priceless nor treasures. 
Since the archaeologists are not stupid, why do they make these claims? 
After all, they didn't used to; quite the contrary.
    Not that long ago the radical, anti-collector archaeologists spent 
a great deal of effort trying to convince the world that ancient 
objects were, in fact, just junk of no real value, unworthy of being 
collected. The reason why people wanted them, or `esteemed them' as the 
radicals would say, is that dealers hyped them up, in the same way that 
the `art' of Damian Hirst and Jeff Koons has been. In their eyes, 
ancient objects were worthy of being in museums where they could be 
studied by real scholars (such as themselves), but private collectors 
were making fools out of themselves by collecting them. There are two 
absolutely iconic studies in this vein, both roughly contemporary. The 
first, by Michael Vickers and David Gill, is Artful Crafts: Ancient 
Greek Silverware and Pottery (Oxford 1994). Vickers is a very good 
scholar who likes shaking things up and is, perhaps, most familiar to 
numismatists from an article in NC 1985, entitled, Early Greek Coinage, 
a Reassessment (pp. 1-44) in which he tried to radically down-date the 
beginning of ancient Greek coinage. His well written and thought 
provoking theories were, three years later, totally demolished by 
Margaret C. Root's wonderful article in NC 1988, Evidence from 
Persepolis for the dating of Persian and archaic Greek Coinage (pp. 1-
12). In Artful Crafts he argued that all Greek painted pottery (Black 
Figure, Red Figure, White Ground, etc.) was designed to be a cheap 
imitation of the luxurious gold, silver and ivory vessels supposedly 
used by the rich, and was, in itself, of no importance. Thus, it had 
nothing to do with Greek painting, only with metal work, and all the 
years of research by art historians into `hands' and named artists was 
mostly a waste of time. For him, Attic Red Figure was related to the 
true art of precious metal vases in the same way as Martha Stewart 
porcelain at Walmart was related to Royal Copenhagen: i.e., not at all! 
He even suggests that the history of the `esteem' for ancient painted 
pottery goes back to the dealers who worked to sell Lord Hamilton's 
large collection of `vases' (the radicals prefer to call them pots 
because `vase' has a connotation of class and value!) by convincing 
`gullible' collectors that they represented the finest of Greek art, 
rather than as the Melmac that he would prefer to see them as! The 
underlying message was, ``You stupid collectors, you've been fooled for 
200 years into thinking this crap was art, even though it was made as a 
cheap imitation of no value. Boy, have you been swindled!!!''
    As you might guess, this book caused an immediate uproar among the 
pot folk (or vase specialists), who promptly went to counterattack 
everything he had to say. In the end, of course, the pot people came 
out on top in the scholarly world, and collectors refused to stop 
collecting since they could see for themselves that many of the pots 
were true artistic masterpieces.
    The second study is an article by David Gill and Christopher 
Chippendale: Material and Intellectual Consequences of Esteem for 
Cycladic Figures, AJA 97/3 (1993), pp. 602-673 (see also, http://
www.mcdonald.cam.ac.uk/projects/chip/chip213.htm). This is another 
beautifully written and very convincing essay, which basically claims 
that the vast majority of Cycladic marble figurines in museums and 
private collections all over the world are all modern fakes because 
virtually none of them have any provenance! Not only that, they go to 
great lengths to `prove' that the figurines are not art, in part by 
suggesting that the people who made them were merely simply farmers who 
had no concept of true art (as if they had whittled them for the kids 
whilst sitting on the back porch). This, of course, is an attack on 
those scholars who studied Cycladic figures and assigned them to 
varying `schools' or, even, to specific `masters' or `hands', thus, in 
G & C's opinion, making the objects more attractive for collectors. 
They also rail against the way the figures are displayed and viewed. 
Modern viewers have always been impressed by the smooth lines and sheer 
whiteness of the figures (they especially influenced famous modern 
artists like Brancussi and Picasso), thus making them seem contemporary 
in spirit, but G & C tell us that we shouldn't look at them this way 
since they were originally garishly painted. In addition, we often 
display them incorrectly since the large tall figures that look so 
ethereal, even Christ-like, when mounted vertically, really were meant 
to be lying down. Thus, modern appreciation for these figures is based 
on false premises because we are not looking at them the way they were 
meant to be looked at when they were made (of course, if they're all 
fake, G & C's efforts to convince us that we're viewing them 
incorrectly seem to be misplaced). Sad to say for G & C, the wide world 
of museums, scholars, collectors and art dealers have resolutely 
refused to be convinced by their brilliantly written dissertation--
Greek archaeologists surely don't believe them since they haven't tried 
to prevent the Greek government from going to court in attempts, 
sometimes successful, at confiscating Cycladic material appearing in 
major auctions (somewhat astoundingly, especially if all this stuff is 
`fake', the catalogue of the greatest collection of unprovenanced and 
illegally excavated Cycladic material in the world, that of the superb 
Goulandris Museum in Athens, was written by none other than that self-
appointed scourge of collectors, Lord Colin Renfrew himself! If this 
isn't world-class hypocrisy, what is?).
    These two extraordinary works were part of a trend that attacked 
collecting and the trade in antiquities by shrilly objecting that 
modern people were appreciating ancient objects for the wrong reasons, 
were placing outrageously high monetary values on them, were viewing 
them in ways they weren't originally meant to be viewed, and were 
displaying them out of their original contexts or far from where they 
were originally made. This last point was particularly bizarre since it 
meant that in their view the only way anyone can truly understand any 
art is to see it where it was made and under the conditions that 
obtained at the time it was created. Using this logic Cycladic art can 
only be understood if it is seen on Naxos, perhaps while drinking an 
ouzaki and munching on a piece of grilled octopus, rather than in 
Athens or Boston or London; and Andy Warhol's works can only be fully 
appreciated in New York City, and only by multi-sexual users of 
recreational drugs, rather than in museums and private homes all over 
the world. It also had the curious result that the old rallying cry of 
the radical archaeologists, that antiquities were the ``common heritage 
of all mankind'', had to be dropped. After all, if Cycladic figures 
were the common heritage of all humankind, it would make sense for them 
to be in museums, and even private collections, all over the world, 
rather than only being the property of the source country where they 
were found as the radicals wished.
    Well, as we know, all these arguments have not been very 
successful, simply because their logic was absurd to begin with, and 
people weren't impressed by them. So what did our radicals do? They 
made a 180+ turn and now claim that all ancient objects are 
inestimable, priceless treasures, of supreme value for the cultural 
heritage of the country in which they are found. That's right, 
everything is priceless: from Palaeolithic stone tools, ordinary 
Neolithic through the Byzantine household pottery, common cylinder 
seals and Roman bronze fibulae, to worn small AE folles of the House of 
Constantine! And since nowadays people all over the world are 
particularly impressed by monetary value (``priceless!'', 
``treasure!''), the radical archaeologists have finally hit on a way to 
impress the media and politicians into believing that a virtual shut 
down of the world's art trade, and the demonization, if not 
criminalization, of collectors is the only way to stop the looting of 
archaeological sites.
    Unfortunately, this strategy seems to be working. In the press, on 
television, and in books like RA's, the antiquities trade, and by 
extension the trade in ancient coins, is under attack as never before; 
with collectors being reviled as the major cause of looting. This is 
being done by highly articulate people who can be quite sincere, but 
whose unquestioning acceptance of the radical archaeologists' programs 
produce biased, one-sided and politically correct reporting.
    How can we fight back? Collectors have to start writing protest 
letters to their political representatives to make their opinions 
heard. We also have to make sure the right questions are asked and 
investigated. Like,
    Why is it that in England, where laws are fair, such a huge amount 
of archaeological finds are reported by the public, often in such 
timely fashion that they can be excavated professionally? Is the fact 
that finders receive prompt and fair rewards for anything wanted by the 
state, while those items not wanted are returned to the finder, a major 
factor behind the widespread acceptance of English heritage laws?
    Why do large numbers of people in the source countries not obey 
their countries' antiquity laws? Is the state's declaration of 
ownership of everything found under the ground, on public or private 
land, one of the direct causes of the black market because rewards for 
compliance are too low to be attractive? Is another cause the fact that 
rewards are less than the amount that local dealers are willing to pay?
    When someone speaks about how important an ancient object is for 
cultural history, or what a `priceless treasure' it is, ask him or her 
why. Why is an ancient pot/bronze figurine/marble sculpture/coin, 
similar or even the same as many others previously known vital for a 
country's heritage?
    The United States is a country built by immigrants, unlike the more 
homogenous states of Europe. At one point Chicago is said to have been 
the second-largest Greek city in the world after Athens, and it is well 
known that millions and millions of Americans have some Italian 
ancestry. Do these people have no right to objects pertaining to their 
heritage? There are surely Greek-Americans and Italian-Americans living 
in the U.S. today whose distant ancestors actually made some of the 
pots, or used some of the coins, found in Greece or Italy today--why 
should these people be excluded from owning such items? If an American 
wants to move to Italy and bring his entire collection with him, he is 
free to do so, but if an Italian wants to move to the USA with his 
paintings, coins and vases, many of his possessions will not be allowed 
out--is this right?
    The radical archaeologists have managed to claim the moral high 
ground in the debate over the trade in coins and antiquities. It is 
about time we push them off it.

                                 <F-dash>

                                Archaeological Institute of America
                                                   Boston, MA 02215
                                                    August 24, 2005
The Honorable E. Clay Shaw
Chairman
Subcommittee on Trade of the Committee on Ways and Means
U.S. House of Representatives

Dear Chairman Shaw:

    As President of the Archaeological Institute of America (AIA), I am 
writing to express my strong support and the support of the AIA for the 
inclusion of H.R. 915 Cultural Conservation of the Crossroads of 
Civilization Act (``A bill to authorize the President to take certain 
actions to protect archaeological or ethnological materials of 
Afghanistan'') in the Miscellaneous Tariffs bill. This Act grants 
authority to the President to impose emergency import restrictions to 
prevent the import into the United States of antiquities and other 
cultural materials that have been illegally removed from the cultural 
institutions and archaeological sites of Afghanistan.
    This bill is particularly important since Afghanistan has not yet 
ratified the 1970 UNESCO Convention and cannot ask for U.S. Protection 
in the normal way under the current Cultural Property Implementation 
Act of 1983. The more than 30 years of chaos in Afghanistan since their 
revolution in 1974, shortly after the UNESCO Convention was written, 
and lack of effective central authority in the country have prevented 
Afghanistan from taking the important step of ratification. In the last 
two decades looting in Afghanistan has been devastating to that 
country's cultural heritage, and since the destruction of the Bamiyan 
Buddhas by the Taliban in 2001 and the current war there the situation 
has become even worse, rivaling, and if anything, exceeding the more 
familiar situation in Iraq. As partial documentation of this 
devastation, the AIA's website contains a description of the looting of 
some major Afghan archaeological sites (www.archaeological.org, see 
under ``Archaeology Watch, Afghanistan's Cultural Heritage''). Among 
other postings may be found the text of an address ``The Impact of War 
upon Afghanistan's Cultural Heritage'' by Mr. Abdul Wasey Feroozi, 
Director General of the National Institute of Archaeology in Kabul. Mr. 
Feroozi's text is supplemented by photographic documentation with 
captions by Dr. Zemaryalai Tarzi, Director for the French Survey and 
Excavation Archaeological Mission and former Director of Archaeology 
and Conservation of Historical Monuments in Afghanistan. An article on 
Dr.Tarzi's current excavations at Bamiyan was published in the January/
February issue of AIA's popular publication, Archaeology Magazine 
(abstract at www.archaeology.org/0501/abstracts/afghan.html), and since 
1998 there have been several other articles on the cultural heritage 
problems in Afghanistan in the magazine. As with Iraq, the United 
States has undertaken a special relationship with Afghanistan and it is 
very important that concern for preservation of the cultural heritage 
of Afghanistan be given equal consideration.
    Antiquities are looted from sites so that they can be sold at high 
prices to markets in Western Europe and the United States. The looting 
of sites often causes irreversible damage to the sites, destroying 
contextual relationships among artifacts and the contexts in which they 
were used or buried in the past such as architecture, tombs, hearths, 
kitchens, temples. Once those relationships are destroyed it becomes 
impossible to reconstruct the full meaning of such artifacts--how they 
were used and valued in the past and who used them. This information is 
crucial to the full understanding and appreciation of the remains of 
any ancient culture. It is critically important that the President be 
given the authority to prevent the import into the United States of 
looted cultural materials from Afghanistan and thereby reduce the 
incentive fortheft and destruction of archaeological sites in that 
country. Enactment of this legislation will help the United States to 
fulfill its obligations to the Afghan people and help to enrich our 
understanding of the world's and our own cultural heritage.
    The AIA was founded in 1879 and chartered by an Act of Congress in 
1906 and is now the oldest and largest non-profit organization in the 
U.S. devoted to archaeology. Our over 8,000 members include not only 
professional archaeologists but also students and members of the 
general public. This latter category makes up a large majority of our 
membership and many of our programs and publications are devoted to 
educating the public about archaeology and cultural heritage and 
fostering an appreciation for the role of archaeology in understanding 
the human past. On behalf of all of our membership I urge you and the 
members of your committee to approve the inclusion of HR 915 in the 
Miscellaneous Tariffs bill and help the Afghan people to protect their 
cultural heritage for themselves and for all of us.

                                                   Jane C. Waldbaum
                     President, Archaeological Institute of America

                                 <F-dash>

                                                  Bryn Mawr College
                                           Bryn Mawr, PA 19010-2899
                                                    August 24, 2005
Congressman E. Clay Shaw
Chairman
Subcommittee on Trade of the Committee on Ways and Means
U.S. House of Representatives

Dear Congressman Shaw,

    I am writing to urge your support for including H.R. 915 Cultural 
Conservation of the Crossroads of Civilization Act (``A bill to 
authorize the President to take certain actions to protect 
archaeological or ethnological materials of Afghanistan'') in the 
Miscellaneous Tariffs bill. This Act grants authority to the President 
to impose emergency import restrictions to prevent the import into the 
United States of antiquities and other cultural materials that have 
been illegally removed from Afghan cultural institutions and other 
locations, particularly archaeological sites in Afghanistan.
    This legislation is necessary because archaeological sites are now 
being looted on a large scale in Afghanistan and, according to recent 
news reports, terrorist groups are selling these illegal antiquities to 
support their terrorist attacks (see attached article from the German 
news magazine Der Spiegel). So aside from protecting the cultural 
heritage of Afghanistan, there is good reason for the United States to 
enact such legislation on the grounds of national and international 
security. The looting of sites and theft from museums in Afghanistan 
have been significant problems for many years. As with Iraq, the United 
States has undertaken a special relationship with Afghanistan. Concern 
for preservation of the cultural heritage of Afghanistan must be given 
equal consideration.
    Sites are looted of antiquities so that they can be sold ultimately 
to markets in Western Europe and the United States. As the attached 
article states, Mohammed Atta was attempting to sell in either 2000 or 
2001 antiquities from Afghanistan, presumably, according to German 
authorities, for the purpose of financing the purchase of an airplane. 
He was referred to Sotheby's auction house. U.S. legislators ought to 
want to act very decisively on legislation that will impose penalties 
for anyone engaging in or abetting the sale of illegal antiquities. 
Therefore, as a first step, it is crucial that the President be given 
this authority to prevent the import into the United States of looted 
cultural materials and thereby reduce the incentive for theft and 
destruction of archaeological sites. Enactment of this legislation will 
help the United States to fulfill its obligations to the Afghan people 
and help to enrich our understanding of the world's and our own 
cultural heritage.
                                                    James C. Wright
                                            Professor and Chairman,
              Member of the Professional Responsibilities Committee
                                Archaeological Institute of America
                                 ______
                                 
Der Spiegel 29/2005, p. 20

    ``ART FOR FINANCING TERRORISM? According to new information from 
the Federal Crime Office (BKA) the pilot-terrorists from Hamburg 
possibly attempted to finance the 9/11 attack through the sale of 
illegal art. The head of the group, the Egyptian Mohammed Atta, spoke 
in 2000 or 2001 to Prof. Brigitte G. of the University of Goettingen 
and offered ``Afghan art with the intention of arranging its 
exchange.'' ``He wanted to know, where antiquities could be marketed,'' 
the scholar remembered. Thereby according to the BKA, Atta had as a 
possible reason also stated that he needed the money in order to 
finance the purchase of an airplane. The contact with Goettingen was 
provided by the Technical University of Hamburg, where he was then 
studying. Although the professor referred him to Sotheby's auction 
house, no sale occurred. At the beginning of 2000 Atta returned to 
Germany from an Al-Qaida training camp in Afghanistan in order to 
prepare for the attack against the USA.''
    Here is the original German version:
    ``KUNST ALS TERRORFINANZIERUNG?
    Die Hamburger Todespiloten haben nach neuen Erkenntnissen des 
Bundeskriminalamts (BKA) moglicherweise versucht, die Anschlage vom 11. 
September 2001 durch illegalen Kunsthandel zu finanzieren. Der Kopf der 
Gruppe, der Agypter Mohammed Atta, sprach 2000 oder 2001 die Gottinger 
Professorin Brigitte G. an und offerierte ``afghanische Kunst mit dem 
Ziel der Weitervermittlung''. ``Er wollte wissen, wo man Antiquitaeten 
vermarkten kann'', erinnert sich die Wissenschaftlerin. Dabei habe 
Atta, so das BKA, am Rande als Begrundung moglicherweise auch 
geaussert, er brauche das Geld, um den Ankauf eines Flugzeugs zu 
finanzieren. Der Kontakt nach Gottingen war uber die Technische 
Universitat Harburg [sic] vermittelt wordern, an der Atta damals 
studierte. Weil die Professorin ihn auf das Auktionshaus Sotheby's 
verwies, kam kein Geschft zustande. Atta war Anfang 2000 aus den Qaida-
Ausbildungslagern in Afghanistan zuruck nach Deutschland gekommen, um 
die Anschlage auf die USA vorzubereiten.''

                                 <F-dash>

                                Archaeological Institute of America
                                                Long Island Society
                                                 Melville, NY 11747
                                                    August 29, 2005
Congressman E. Clay Shaw
Chairman
Subcommittee on Trade of the Committee on Ways and Means
U.S. House of Representatives

Dear Congressman Shaw:

    I am writing to ask you to strongly support the HR915 Cultural 
Conservation of the Crossroads of Civilization Act. This act will give 
the President the authority to help stem the tide of illegal 
antiquities that are being drained from Afghanistan.
    Afghanistan has many archaeological sites that were once thriving 
cities on the great Silk Road that linked China and India to the 
western world. These sites and the artifacts found in them constitute 
an important part of our world heritage. As tourists, we have 
personally traveled portions of the Silk Road and would be appalled if 
any of this heritage is lost. As members of the Archaeological 
Institute of America, we are particularly aware of and sensitive to 
this issue. We know your support will help advance our understanding of 
world civilization.
                                                         Naomi Taub
                                              Education Chairperson

                                                        Jesse Taub,
                                                             Member

                                 <F-dash>

                                Archaeological Institute of America
                                                  Milwaukee Society
                                                Milwaukee, WI 53202
                                                    August 25, 2005
Congressman E. Clay Shaw
Chairman
Subcommittee on Trade of the Committee on Ways and Means
U.S. House of Representatives

Dear Congressman Shaw,

    I am writing to urge your support for including H.R. 915 Cultural 
Conservation of the Crossroads of Civilization Act (``A bill to 
authorize the President to take certain actions to protect 
archaeological or ethnological materials of Afghanistan'') in the 
Miscellaneous Tariffs bill. This Act grants authority to the President 
to impose emergency import restrictions to prevent the import into the 
United States of antiquities and other cultural materials that have 
been illegally removed from Afghan cultural institutions and other 
locations, particularly archaeological sites in Afghanistan.
    This legislation is necessary because archaeological sites are now 
being looted on a large scale in Afghanistan. The heritage of 
Afghanistan has played an important role in the world's historical and 
cultural development. The looting of sites destroys the historical, 
cultural, religious and scientific information that is derived through 
the careful, systematic excavation of sites. When this record is 
destroyed we are all the poorer for it.
    The looting of sites and theft from museums in Afghanistan have 
been significant problems for many years. As with Iraq, the United 
States has undertaken a special relationship with Afghanistan. Concern 
for preservation of the cultural heritage of Afghanistan must be given 
equal consideration.
    Sites are looted of antiquities so that they can be sold ultimately 
to markets in Western Europe and the United States. It is crucial that 
the President be given this authority to prevent the import into the 
United States of looted cultural materials and thereby reduce the 
incentive for theft and destruction of archaeological sites. Enactment 
of this legislation will help the United States to fulfill its 
obligations to the Afghan people and help to enrich our understanding 
of the world's and our own cultural heritage.
                                                  Katherine Murrell
                              Public Relations/Outreach Coordinator

                                 <F-dash>

                                    Archaeological Legacy Institute
                                               Eugene, Oregon 97405
                                                    August 22, 2005
Congressman E. Clay Shaw
Chairman
Subcommittee on Trade
Committee on Ways and Means
U.S. House of Representatives

Dear Congressman Shaw,

    I am the Executive Director of a 501(c)(3) nonprofit dedicated to 
the sharing of information and perspectives relating to the human 
cultural heritage worldwide. But before we can share this heritage, we 
must first protect it.
    I am writing to urge your support for including H.R. 915 Cultural 
Conservation of the Crossroads of Civilization Act (``A bill to 
authorize the President to take certain actions to protect 
archaeological or ethnological materials of Afghanistan'') in the 
Miscellaneous Tariffs bill. This Act grants authority to the President 
to impose emergency import restrictions to prevent the import into the 
United States of antiquities and other cultural materials that have 
been illegally removed from Afghan cultural institutions and other 
locations, particularly archaeological sites in Afghanistan. This 
legislation is necessary because archaeological sites are now being 
looted on a large scale in Afghanistan. The heritage of Afghanistan has 
played an important role in the world's historical and cultural 
development. The looting of sites destroys the historical, cultural, 
religious and scientific information that is derived through the 
careful, systematic excavation of sites. When this record is destroyed 
we are all the poorer for it.
    The looting of sites and theft from museums in Afghanistan have 
been significant problems for many years. As with Iraq, the United 
States has undertaken a special relationship with Afghanistan. Concern 
for preservation of the cultural heritage of Afghanistan must be given 
equal consideration.
    Sites are looted of antiquities so that they can be sold ultimately 
to markets in Western Europe and the United States. It is crucial that 
the President be given this authority to prevent the import into the 
United States of looted cultural materials and thereby reduce the 
incentive for theft and destruction of archaeological sites. Enactment 
of this legislation will help the United States to fulfill its 
obligations to the Afghan people and help to enrich our understanding 
of the world's and our own cultural heritage.
            Sincerely yours,
                                   Richard M. Pettigrew, Ph.D., RPA
                                                 Executive Director

                                 <F-dash>
                      Association of Dedicated Byzantine Collectors
                                   Framingham, Massachusetts 017042
                                                     September 2005
Dear Sirs:

    I am writing to oppose efforts to restrict the importation of coins 
from Afghanistan. Coins from this area are numerous and there is 
abundance for local and international research. Restricting their 
importation would result in large quantities of coins that would become 
unavailable for collectors and dealers from all over the world. This 
category of researcher adds significantly to the knowledge of the 
countries they study and we all profit from this added information.
    Please ensure that American numismatists will be able to collect 
and study coins from Afghanistan. Coins are a valuable addition to the 
study of history and no country exists in a vacuum. We learn economics, 
politics, gender issues as well as the straight history. This 
information enriches us all, and gives us an understanding of each 
other and each other's cultures. In a time when we are all struggling 
to find ``place'' in the world, this is particularly important.
            Sincerely,
                                              Prudence Morgan Fitts
                                                          President

                                 <F-dash>

            Bard Graduate Center for Studies in the Decorative Arts
                                           New York, New York 10024
                                                    August 17, 2005
Congressman E. Clay Shaw, Chairman
Subcommittee on Trade of the Committee on Ways and Means
U.S. House of Representatives

Dear Congressman Shaw,

    I am an archaeologist and professor of ancient art at the Bard 
Graduate Center in New York City. I have worked for more than 25 years 
restoring the ancient wooden furniture excavated at the site of Gordion 
in Turkey, which belonged to the famous Phrygian King Midas and his 
family. I have twice received grants from the National Endowment for 
the Humanities for this project, which has involved an international 
team of archaeologists and conservators. Support for this important 
work by NEH and the United States government clearly indicates to me 
that our elected officials have a serious and continuing interest in 
the cultural heritage of the Middle East.
    In this regard, I am writing to you to urge your support for 
including H.R. 915, Cultural Conservation of the Crossroads of 
Civilization Act (``A bill to authorize the President to take certain 
actions to protect archaeological or ethnological materials of 
Afghanistan''), in the Miscellaneous Tariffs bill. This Act grants 
authority to the President to impose emergency import restrictions to 
prevent the import into the United States of antiquities and other 
cultural materials that have been illegally removed from Afghan 
cultural institutions and other locations, particularly archaeological 
sites in Afghanistan.
    Immediate enactment of this legislation is extremely important, 
since the plundering of Afghan archaeological sites is taking place on 
a large scale right now. Afghanistan has played a crucial role in the 
world's historical and cultural development, and the looting of Afghan 
sites is seriously compromising the country's cultural heritage. When 
the archaeological record is destroyed, all the world's people loose an 
important part of their collective cultural heritage. This was 
demonstrated by the widespread outrage that resulted from the recent 
destruction of the Buddha statues at Bamiyan.
    Archaeological sites are plundered for antiquities that are traded 
largely through markets in Western Europe, many ultimately finding 
their way to the United States. We must therefore take responsibility 
for the problem and do what we can to stop it. It is crucial that the 
President be given the authority to prevent the import into the United 
States of looted cultural materials from Afghanistan. This will reduce 
the incentive for the looting and destruction of archaeological sites 
and help us to fulfill our obligations to the Afghan people to protect 
the precious remains of their ancient culture.
    Sincerely,
                                                  Elizabeth Simpson
                                                          Professor

                                 <F-dash>

                                            University of Tennessee
                                            Frank H. McClung Museum
                                         Knoxville, Tennessee 27917
                                                    August 18, 2005
Congressman E. Clay Shaw
Chairman Subcommittee on Trade of the Committee on Ways and Means U.S. 
    House of Representatives

Dear Congressman Shaw,

    My name is Bobby R. Braly and I am a doctoral student at the 
University of Tennessee in the department of Anthropology. With the 
current conditions overseas, I am writing to urge your support for 
including H.R. 915 Cultural Conservation of the Crossroads of 
Civilization Act (``A bill to authorize the President to take certain 
actions to protect archaeological or ethnological materials of 
Afghanistan'') in the Miscellaneous Tariffs bill. This Act grants 
authority to the President to impose emergency import restrictions to 
prevent the import into the United States of antiquities and other 
cultural materials that have been illegally removed from Afghan 
cultural institutions and other locations, particularly archaeological 
sites in Afghanistan. This legislation is necessary because 
archaeological sites are now being looted on a large scale in 
Afghanistan. The heritage of Afghanistan has played an important role 
in the world's historical and cultural development. The looting of 
sites destroys the historical, cultural, religious and scientific 
information that is derived through the careful, systematic excavation 
of sites. When this record is destroyed we are all the poorer forint. 
Mr. Congressman I spent three months last summer excavating in Jordan 
and would like to further emphasize the importance of antiquities from 
this region. Although now an economically deprived area, the Middle 
East was once home to some of the greatest civilizations of early 
history. The corresponding artifacts are inherently important and must 
be preserved. You are certainly aware that cultural resources are non-
renewable resources as that is why this letter has been sent with great 
fear for loss and/or destruction to archaeological or ethnological 
materials of Afghanistan
    The looting of sites and theft from museums in Afghanistan have 
been significant problems for many years. As with Iraq, the United 
States has undertaken a special relationship with Afghanistan. Concern 
for preservation of the cultural heritage of Afghanistan must be given 
equal consideration. Sites are looted of antiquities so that they can 
be sold ultimately to markets in Western Europe and the United States. 
It is crucial that the President be given this authority to prevent the 
import into the United States of looted cultural materials and thereby 
reduce the incentive for theft and destruction of archaeological sites. 
Enactment of this legislation will help the United States to fulfill 
its obligations to the Afghan people and help to enrich our 
understanding of the world's and our own cultural heritage
            Thank you,
                                        Bobby R. Braly M.A., R.P.A.

                                 <F-dash>

                                      Lancaster, Pennsylvania 17603
                                                    August 18, 2005
Congressman E. Clay Shaw
Chairman
Subcommittee on Trade of the Committee on Ways and Means
U.S. House of Representatives

Dear Congressman Shaw,

    I am writing to urge your support for including H.R. 915 Cultural 
Conservation of the Crossroads of Civilization Act (``A bill to 
authorize the President to take certain actions to protect 
archaeological or ethnological materials of Afghanistan'') in the 
Miscellaneous Tariffs bill. This Act grants authority to the President 
to impose emergency import restrictions to prevent the import into the 
United States of antiquities and other cultural materials that have 
been illegally removed from Afghan cultural institutions and other 
locations, particularly archaeological sites in Afghanistan. This 
legislation is necessary because archaeological sites are now being 
looted on a large scale in Afghanistan.
    The heritage of Afghanistan has played an important role in the 
world's historical and cultural development. The looting of sites 
destroys the historical, cultural, religious and scientific information 
that is derived through the careful, systematic excavation of sites. 
When this record is destroyed we are all the poorer for it. The looting 
of sites and theft from museums in Afghanistan have been significant 
problems for many years. As with Iraq, the United States has undertaken 
a special relationship with Afghanistan. Concern for preservation of 
the cultural heritage of Afghanistan must be given equal consideration.
    Sites are looted of antiquities so that they can be sold ultimately 
to markets in Western Europe and the United States. It is crucial that 
the President be given this authority to prevent the import into the 
United States of looted cultural materials and thereby reduce the 
incentive for theft and destruction of archaeological sites. Enactment 
of this legislation will help the United States to fulfill its 
obligations to the Afghan people and help to enrich our understanding 
of the world's and our own cultural heritage.
                                                     Kelly M. Britt
                                                Columbia University

                                 <F-dash>

   Statement of Eric J. McFadden, Classical Numismatic Group, Inc., 
                        Lancaster, Pennsylvania
    Our firm, Classical Numismatic Group, Inc., is one of hundreds of 
small firms that deal in ancient coins. As members of the trade in 
cultural property, we take seriously our obligation to preserve and 
protect the objects in which we deal, and we deplore the destruction or 
theft of all objects of archaeological interest and the disruption of 
archaeological sites. We also oppose any import restriction which would 
apply to coins, for the reasons which follow, and we urge either that 
H.R. 915 be defeated or that it be amended to provide a specific 
exemption for coins.
Introduction
    Ancient coins of the sort struck within the confines of present day 
Afghanistan are extremely common, with millions of examples extant. 
They have been avidly collected for hundreds of years and today are 
dispersed among collections throughout the world. There is normally no 
way to distinguish coins which have long resided in collections from 
coins which have been recently excavated, and so a restriction on all 
these coins would inevitably be an unreasonable restriction on vast 
numbers of coins which have been in collections for decades or 
centuries. American museums, dealers, and private collectors have all 
played a major role in preserving and studying ancient coins, and 
without their continuing efforts research and preservation of these 
small tokens from the past would suffer greatly.
    Furthermore, restrictions on the importation of ancient coins would 
not provide any significant protection to archaeological sites because 
few ancient coins are actually found in archaeological strata. The 
coins in exceptional condition which are valued by collectors are 
almost always found in savings or emergency hoards deposited outside 
any archaeological stratum. As a result, these ``hoard coins'' are not 
of use for dating any related archaeological context.
    Among the many arguments why it is fair and reasonable to permit 
Americans to import, collect, and study ancient coins, we would like to 
focus here--from our perspective as a dealer in ancient coins--on why 
any restriction would be unworkable from a practical standpoint.
1. Ancient Coins Exist in Enormous Quantities
    Coins are perhaps the commonest relics of antiquity. Millions and 
millions of ancient coins have been found. One can understand the 
desire of a country to prevent the loss of unique items of cultural 
significance, but coins do not fall into this category. The vast 
majority of coins are common items, existing in a great many similar or 
nearly identical examples. Due to the numbers involved, if coins were 
brought into any regime of import restriction, the potential burdens 
would be enormous, for collectors, dealers and U.S. Customs. Our 
company alone imports well over 10,000 ancient coins per year into the 
U.S., and we are only one of more than 100 dealers who import ancient 
coins. How would we manage to produce documentation to comply with 
import restrictions, and how would U.S. Customs manage to analyze and 
process such documentation?
2. The Place of Manufacture of an Ancient Coin May Be Unknown
    Not only is the number of coins enormous, but the difficulty of 
identifying the origin of each piece may be likewise great. In dealing 
with a restriction on items of Afghani ``origin'', it may be impossible 
to determine even whether a particular coin was made in Afghanistan. 
For much of recorded history, part or all of Afghanistan has been 
within the boundaries of various great imperial powers: the Persians, 
Alexander the Great and his successors, the Parthians, the Sasanians, 
the Kushans, the Scythians, the Mongols, the Mughals, and others. These 
empires typically controlled large areas unrelated to modern borders 
and issued coins at numerous mints, the precise location of which may 
not be known. Hence it may simply be impossible to say whether a 
particular coin was made within the borders of modern day Afghanistan 
or elsewhere.
3. Even if the Place of Minting is Known, This Has Little Bearing on 
        Determining a Find Spot
    In the ancient world, coins often circulated far from their point 
of origin. Coins issued in one part of a great empire, for example, 
regularly circulated in other parts. Accordingly, even if one does know 
where a coin was minted, this is no guide as to where it may have 
ultimately come to rest. Indeed, coins were items of trade, valued for 
their metal content, and are found far outside the borders of whatever 
authority issued them. To scrutinize every coin that may possibly have 
been minted in Afghanistan, in order to determine whether it may also 
have been found in Afghanistan, would place an enormous burden on 
dealers, collectors, and customs agents. Moreover, in almost every 
case, even with the best intentions and most diligent effort, a find 
site would simply be impossible to determine.
4. Actual Provenance of Ancient Coins Is Amost Always Unavailable
    Modern collecting of ancient coins began in the Renaissance. 
Initially the province of royalty and aristocracy, collecting spread to 
the educated elite and then to the middle classes. Ancient coins have 
long been collected by Americans as tangible links to our cultural 
origins, and prominent American collectors have included John Quincy 
Adams, Cornelius Vanderbilt and J.P. Morgan. During the intervening 
several hundred years since the Renaissance, coins have been collected, 
have traded hands, and have moved across borders largely unhindered. 
Only occasionally has the actual find spot of a coin been recorded and 
retained with the coin to the present time. Coins are by their nature 
portable items, and it is not unusual today for a coin to change hands 
several times during a week or even a day at one of the international 
coin conventions. The field is highly international, in that dealers 
and collectors routinely travel to buy coins. Major international 
conventions are held every year in New York, Chicago, London, Paris, 
Zurich, Munich, Berlin, Verona, and many other cities. Dealers and 
collectors visit these conventions to buy and sell. A dealer from 
Norway may bring a coin to a convention in New York, sell it to a 
dealer from Spain, who then sells it to another dealer, and so on. Any 
history that may have been attached to a coin can vanish quickly. Even 
a coin that has graced important collections over the past century or 
longer may appear on the market without any record of its modern 
history. Accordingly, the provenance of a coin is normally unknown. To 
require an importer to produce such a provenance would be to require 
the impossible.
5. Import Restrictions Would Be an Unfair Hindrance to Collecting
    As suggested above, it is extremely difficult to identify coins 
which may have been exported from Afghanistan. First, one may not even 
know where a coin was originally minted. Second, even if one knows the 
mint, this is no indication of where the coin was found. Third, 
regardless of where a coin may have been found, it may have a long, 
legitimate, and indeed distinguished--but unknown--modern history.
    Any import restrictions on coins would create a considerable and 
unfair burden for U.S. collectors and dealers, as well as U.S. Customs. 
Moreover, the difficulty of determining the modern provenance of 
ancient coins would render such restrictions ineffective in actually 
identifying items to be excluded. The result, therefore, would be the 
creation of a costly and burdensome customs regime which would unfairly 
disadvantage American museums, collectors, and dealers.

                                 <F-dash>

                                                  Wheaton, IL 60187
                                                    August 18, 2005
Congressman E. Clay Shaw
Chairman
Subcommittee on Trade of the Committee on Ways and Means U.S. House of 
    Representatives

Dear Congressman Shaw,

    I am an archaeologist and have a general interest in preservation 
of Archaeological sites. I work in Peru, where the pace of destruction 
of sites is so rapid that my small excavations, often only a single 
test pit 3 x 6 ft in size, are likely to be the only work ever carried 
out before these ancient places are destroyed. I know that all sites 
cannot be preserved, but I believe it is important to try and same some 
of them.
    For this reason, I am writing to urge your support for including 
H.R. 915 Cultural Conservation of the Crossroads of Civilization Act 
(``A bill to authorize the President to take certain actions to protect 
archaeological or ethnological materials of Afghanistan'') in the 
Miscellaneous Tariffs bill. This Act grants authority to the President 
to impose emergency import restrictions to prevent the import into the 
United States of antiquities and other cultural materials that have 
been illegally removed from Afghan cultural institutions and other 
locations, particularly archaeological sites in Afghanistan. This 
legislation is necessary because archaeological sites are now being 
looted on a large scale in Afghanistan. The heritage of Afghanistan has 
played an important role in the world's historical and cultural 
development. The looting of sites destroys the historical, cultural, 
religious and scientific information that is derived through the 
careful, systematic excavation of sites. When this record is destroyed 
we are all the poorer for it.
    The looting of sites and theft from museums in Afghanistan have 
been significant problems for many years. As with Iraq, the United 
States has undertaken a special relationship with Afghanistan. Concern 
for preservation of the cultural heritage of Afghanistan must be given 
equal consideration.
    Sites are looted of antiquities so that they can be sold ultimately 
to markets in Western Europe and the United States. It is crucial that 
the President be given this authority to prevent the import into the 
United States of looted cultural materials and thereby reduce the 
incentive for theft and destruction of archaeological sites. Enactment 
of this legislation will help the United States to fulfill its 
obligations to the Afghan people and help to enrich our understanding 
of the world's and our own cultural heritage.
    I hope my children will one day be able to visit Afghanistan and 
see its ancient treasures in the places where they were first created. 
You can help realize this dream by protecting Afghan national 
treasures.
            Best wishes,
                                                   Winifred Creamer
                                        (Professor of Anthropology,
                                      Northern Illinois University,
                                                  Dekalb, IL 60115)

                                 <F-dash>

                                         Pasadena, California 91105
                                                  September 2, 2005
Congressman E. Clay Shaw
Chairman
Subcommittee on Trade of the Committee on Ways and Means
U.S. House of Representatives

Dear Congressman Shaw,

    I am an Afghan-American woman living in the U.S. and I am writing 
to urge your support for including H.R. 915 Cultural Conservation of 
the Crossroads of Civilization Act (``A bill to authorize the President 
to take certain actions to protect archaeological or ethnological 
materials of Afghanistan'') in the Miscellaneous Tariffs bill. This Act 
grants authority to the President to impose emergency import 
restrictions to prevent the import into the United States of 
antiquities and other cultural materials that have been illegally 
removed from Afghan cultural institutions and other locations, 
particularly archaeological sites in Afghanistan.
    This legislation is necessary because archaeological sites are now 
being looted on a large scale in Afghanistan. The heritage of 
Afghanistan has played an important role in the world's historical and 
cultural development. The looting of sites destroys the historical, 
cultural, religious and scientific information that is derived through 
the careful, systematic excavation of sites. When this record is 
destroyed we are all the poorer for it.
    The looting of sites and theft from museums in Afghanistan have 
been significant problems for many years. As with Iraq, the United 
States has undertaken a special relationship with Afghanistan. Concern 
for preservation of the cultural heritage of Afghanistan must be given 
equal consideration. Sites are looted of antiquities so that they can 
be sold ultimately to markets in Western Europe and the United States. 
It is crucial that the President be given this authority to prevent the 
import into the United States of looted cultural materials and thereby 
reduce the incentive for theft and destruction of archaeological sites. 
Enactment of this legislation will help the United States to fulfill 
its obligations to the Afghan people and help to enrich our 
understanding of the world's and our own cultural heritage.
            Sincerely,
                                           Soraya Delawari Dancsecs

                                              Mark Stephen Dancsecs

                                 <F-dash>

                                        San Diego, California 92127
                                                  September 1, 2005
Congressman E. Clay Shaw
Chairman
Subcommittee on Trade of the Committee on Ways and Means
U.S. House of Representatives

Dear Congressman Shaw,

    I am writing to urge your support for including H.R. 915 Cultural 
Conservation of the Crossroads of Civilization Act (``A bill to 
authorize the President to take certain actions to protect 
archaeological or ethnological materials of Afghanistan'') in the 
Miscellaneous Tariffs bill. This Act grants authority to the President 
to impose emergency import restrictions to prevent the import into the 
United States of antiquities and other cultural materials that have 
been illegally removed from Afghan cultural institutions and other 
locations, particularly archaeological sites in Afghanistan. This 
legislation is necessary because archaeological sites are now being 
looted on a large scale in Afghanistan. The heritage of Afghanistan has 
played an important role in the world's historical and cultural 
development. The looting of sites destroys the historical, cultural, 
religious and scientific information that is derived through the 
careful, systematic excavation of sites. When this record is destroyed 
we are all the poorer for it.
    The looting of sites and theft from museums in Afghanistan have 
been significant problems for many years. As with Iraq, the United 
States has undertaken a special relationship with Afghanistan. Concern 
for preservation of the cultural heritage of Afghanistan must be given 
equal consideration.
    Sites are looted of antiquities so that they can be sold ultimately 
to markets in Western Europe and the United States. It is crucial that 
the President be given this authority to prevent the import into the 
United States of looted cultural materials and thereby reduce the 
incentive fort heft and destruction of archaeological sites. Enactment 
of this legislation will help the United States to fulfill its 
obligations to the Afghan people and help to enrich our understanding 
of the world's and our own cultural heritage.
            Sincerely,
                                                    Qudrat Delawari

                                                   Yasmine Delawari

                                 <F-dash>

                                                   Bethel, CT 06801
                                                    August 29, 2005
    This letter is in regard to H.R. 915, a bill currently under 
consideration in the Trade Subcommittee of the House Ways and Means 
Committee.
    This bill, although laudable in its stated purpose of preserving 
the cultural heritage of Afghanistan, creates more problems than it 
solves. Most significantly, it turns law abiding American citizens into 
the victims of the failed enforcement of laws in other countries. Some 
of the most notable faults of this bill are:

    1.  It is excessive in scope and proposes to restrict importation 
into the United States of even minor, insignificant objects, like 
coins, simply because they are old.
    2.  The justifications presented in this bill are grossly 
inaccurate. Claims of 100% looting of the Kabul Museum have been proven 
unfounded by a special report of the National Geographic Society which 
shows that the museum's greatest treasures were always secure in 
storage and purposely not revealed by international archaeologists. 
Nevertheless, the inflammatory and false claims of loss continue to be 
presented as justification for passage of H.R. 915.
    3.  U.S. Import restrictions on antiquities, especially on coins, 
would do nothing to diminish site looting in Afghanistan and would have 
an extremely detrimental effect on the private scholarship and cultural 
interaction that these coins have fostered for several centuries.

    If import restrictions are deemed essential, please at least exempt 
coins and other minor objects from the list of considered objects. 
Coins, by their very nature as tokens of commerce, were struck in the 
millions and purposely intended to circulate as widely as possible. 
They are not cultural property or national treasures but belong to 
anyone, anywhere, who has obtained them through fair and legal 
exchange.
    I ask you not to support this bill.
                                                      Paul DiMarzio

                                 <F-dash>

                                                 Oxford, Ohio 45056
                                                  September 1, 2005
Congressman E. Clay Shaw
Chairman
Subcommittee on Trade of the Committee on Ways and Means
U.S. House of Representatives

Dear Congressman Shaw,

    I am writing to urge your support for including H.R. 915 Cultural 
Conservation of the Crossroads of Civilization Act (``A bill to 
authorize the President to take certain actions to protect 
archaeological or ethnological materials of Afghanistan'') in the 
Miscellaneous Tariffs bill. This Act grants authority to the President 
to impose emergency import restrictions to prevent the import into the 
United States of antiquities and other cultural materials that have 
been illegally removed from Afghan cultural institutions and other 
locations, particularly archaeological sites in Afghanistan. This 
legislation is necessary because archaeological sites are now being 
looted on a large scale in Afghanistan. The heritage of Afghanistan has 
played an important role in the world's historical and cultural 
development. The looting of sites destroys the historical, cultural, 
religious and scientific information that is derived through the 
careful, systematic excavation of sites. When this record is destroyed 
we are all the poorer for it. As a student of the classics at Miami 
University, I have an immense appreciation and support the building and 
maintaining Afghanistan's cultural heritage.
    The looting of sites and theft from museums in Afghanistan have 
been significant problems for many years. As with Iraq, the 
UnitedStates has undertaken a special relationship with Afghanistan. 
Concern for preservation of the cultural heritage of Afghanistan must 
be given equal consideration.Sites are looted of antiquities so that 
they can be sold ultimately to markets in Western Europe and the United 
States. It is crucial that the President be given this authority to 
prevent the import into the United States of looted cultural materials 
and thereby reduce the incentive for theft and destruction of 
archaeological sites. Enactment of this legislation will help the 
United States to fulfill its obligations to the Afghan people and help 
to enrich our understanding of the world's and our own cultural 
heritage.
                                                         Tara Eagle

                                 <F-dash>

                                               Texas A&M University
College Station, TX 77843
                                                    August 19, 2005
Congressman E. Clay Shaw
Chairman
Subcommittee on Trade
Committee on Ways and Means
U.S. House of Representatives

Dear Congressman,

    I am writing to urge your support for including H.R. 915 Cultural 
Conservation of the Crossroads of Civilization Act (``A bill to 
authorize the President to take certain actions to protect 
archaeological or ethnological materials of Afghanistan'') in the 
Miscellaneous Tariffs bill. This Act grants authority to the President 
to impose emergency import restrictions to prevent the import into the 
United States of antiquities and other cultural materials that have 
been illegally removed from Afghan cultural institutions and other 
locations, particularly archaeological sites in Afghanistan. This 
legislation is necessary because archaeological sites are now being 
looted on a large scale in Afghanistan. The heritage of Afghanistan has 
played an important role in the world's historical and cultural 
development. The looting of sites destroys the historical, cultural, 
religious and scientific information that is derived through the 
careful, systematic excavation of sites. When this record is destroyed 
we are all the poorer for it.
    The looting of sites and theft from museums in Afghanistan have 
been significant problems for many years. As with Iraq, the United 
States has undertaken a special relationship with Afghanistan. Concern 
for preservation of the cultural heritage of Afghanistan must be given 
equal consideration. Sites are looted of antiquities so that they can 
be sold ultimately to markets in Western Europe and the United States. 
It is crucial that the President be given this authority to prevent the 
import into the United States of looted cultural materials and thereby 
reduce the incentive for theft and destruction of archaeological sites. 
Enactment of this legislation will help the United States to fulfill 
its obligations to the Afghan people and help to enrich our 
understanding of the world's and our own cultural heritage.
            Sincerely,
                                              Dr. Suzanne L. Eckert
                                         Department of Anthropology


                                 <F-dash>

        Engineering and Science Students for the Reconstruction of 
                                                Afghanistan (ESSRA)
                                                  Fremont, CA 33273
                                                  September 1, 2005
Congressman E. Clay Shaw
Chairman
Subcommittee on Trade of the Committee on Ways and Means
U.S. House of Representatives
Dear Congressman Shaw,
    I am writing to urge your support for including H.R. 915 Cultural 
Conservation of the Crossroads of Civilization Act (``A bill to 
authorize the President to take certain actions to protect 
archaeological or ethnological materials of Afghanistan'') in the 
Miscellaneous Tariffs bill. This Act grants authority to the President 
to impose emergency import restrictions to prevent the import into the 
United States of antiquities and other cultural materials that have 
been illegally removed from Afghan cultural institutions and other 
locations, particularly archaeological sites in Afghanistan.
    This legislation is necessary because archaeological sites are now 
being looted on a large scale in Afghanistan. The heritage of 
Afghanistan has played an important role in the world's historical and 
cultural development. The looting of sites destroys the historical, 
cultural, religious and scientific information that is derived through 
the careful, systematic excavation of sites. When this record is 
destroyed we are all the poorer for it.
    The looting of sites and theft from museums in Afghanistan have 
been significant problems for many years. As with Iraq, the United 
States has undertaken a special relationship with Afghanistan. Concern 
for preservation of the cultural heritage of Afghanistan must be given 
equal consideration.
    Sites are looted of antiquities so that they can be sold ultimately 
to markets in Western Europe and the United States. It is crucial that 
the President be given this authority to prevent the import into the 
United States of looted cultural materials and thereby reduce the 
incentive for theft and destruction of archaeological sites. Enactment 
of this legislation will help the United States to fulfill its 
obligations to the Afghan people and help to enrich our understanding 
of the world's and our own cultural heritage.
                                                     Masood Sattari
                                                 Executive Director

                                 <F-dash>

                    [By permission of the Chairman:]

       European Association of Archaeologists, University of Exeter
                                             Exeter, United Kingdom
                                                  September 2, 2005
Congressman E. Clay Shaw
Chairman
Subcommittee on Trade of the Committee on Ways and Means
U.S. House of Representatives

Dear Congressman Shaw

    I write to you as President of the European Association of 
Archaeologists, an organisation representing more than 1000 
professional archaeologists from all countries of Europe and several 
outside it, especially the United States. My Board has been alarmed to 
hear of the illegal excavation and export of antiquities from 
Afghanistan, and their subsequent appearance on the market in the U.S. 
and elsewhere, including western Europe.
    I am writing to urge your support for including H.R. 915 Cultural 
Conservation of the Crossroads of Civilization Act (``A bill to 
authorize the President to take certain actions to protect 
archaeological or ethnological materials of Afghanistan'') in the 
Miscellaneous Tariffs bill. This Act grants authority to the President 
to impose emergency import restrictions to prevent the import into the 
United States of antiquities and other cultural materials that have 
been illegally removed from Afghan cultural institutions and other 
locations, particularly archaeological sites in Afghanistan.
    Looting of archaeological sites and museums, and despoliation of 
other monuments is a problem world-wide, but this is especially so in 
countries that are facing problems of law and order, as is the case in 
Afghanistan and Iraq. Afghanistan has a rich heritage of sites and 
monuments, which the illegal removal of antiquities and art objects 
destroys. Objects removed from their context may be valuable on the 
market as art items but are useless in terms of scientific 
understanding. Short-term financial gain for a few destroys long-term 
knowledge for everyone else.
    The looting of sites and museums occurs so that objects can be sold 
on to markets in countries where rich art collectors live, principally 
western Europe and the United States. Poor people in the affected areas 
understandably seek immediate financial reward from objects they can 
easily recover from the ground. The only effective way to prevent such 
looting is to remove the market for such objects. It is crucial that 
the President be given this authority to prevent the import into the 
United States of looted cultural materials and thereby reduce the 
incentive for theft and destruction of archaeological sites. Enactment 
of this legislation will help the United States to fulfill its 
obligations to the Afghan people and help to enrich our understanding 
of the world's cultural heritage.
                                          Professor Anthony Harding
                                                          President

                                 <F-dash>

                                                     Wabash College
                                               Louisville, KY 40205
                                                    August 29, 2005
Congressman E. Clay Shaw
Chairman
Subcommittee on Trade of the Committee on Ways and Means
U.S. House of Representatives

Dear Congressman Shaw,

    I taught at Wabash College in Indiana for forty years and, during 
that time, I was involved in Greece with several archaeological 
excavations. I care deeply for artifacts and feel that they should stay 
in their country of origin. The United States should do everything in 
its power to stop illicit trade in looted antiquities.
    I am writing to urge your support for including H.R. 915 Cultural 
Conservation of the Crossroads of Civilization Act (``A bill to 
authorize the President to take certain actions to protect 
archaeological or ethnological materials of Afghanistan'') in the 
Miscellaneous Tariffs bill. This Act grants authority to the President 
to impose emergency import restrictions to prevent the import into the 
United States of antiquities and other cultural materials that have 
been illegally removed from Afghan cultural institutions and other 
locations, particularly archaeological sites in Afghanistan.
    This legislation is necessary because archaeological sites are now 
being looted on a large scale in Afghanistan. The heritage of 
Afghanistan has played an important role in the world's historical and 
cultural development. The looting of sites destroys the historical, 
cultural, religious and scientific information that is derived through 
the careful, systematic excavation of sites. When this record is 
destroyed we are all the poorer for it.
    The looting of sites and theft from museums in Afghanistan have 
been significant problems for many years. As with Iraq, the United 
States has undertaken a special relationship with Afghanistan. Concern 
for preservation of the cultural heritage of Afghanistan must be given 
equal consideration.
    Sites are looted of antiquities so that they can be sold ultimately 
to markets in Western Europe and the United States. It is crucial that 
the President be given this authority to prevent the import into the 
United States of looted cultural materials and thereby reduce the 
incentive for theft and destruction of archaeological sites. Enactment 
of this legislation will help the United States to fulfill its 
obligations to the Afghan people and help to enrich our understanding 
of the world's and our own cultural heritage.
                                                    John E. Fischer
                                    Professor of Classics, Emeritus

                                 <F-dash>

                                                  Waltham, MA 02451
                                                    August 29, 2005
Congressman E. Clay Shaw, Chairman
Subcommittee on Trade of the Committee on Ways and Means
U.S. House of Representatives

Dear Congressman,

    I am writing to urge that you do not support H.R. 915, a bill 
currently under consideration in the Trade Subcommittee of the House 
Ways and Means Committee. If import restrictions are deemed essential, 
please at least exempt coins and other minor objects from the list of 
considered objects.
    As a private collector of ancient coins, I feel such import 
restrictions are unnecessary and undesirable for several reasons:

    1)  Ancient coins are not natural treasures. They were made for the 
sole intention of enabling commerce, and for that reason often 
circulated far beyond an individual nation's borders. As noted in the 
introductory text of H.R. 915, Afghanistan was the crossroads of many 
civilizations in ancient times. It has therefore thrived on the flow of 
coins in international trade.
    2)  Ancient coins are also typically not found associated with 
important archeological sites, having been lost by chance or buried in 
isolated context by their original owner's during times of crisis. 
Therefore ancient coins rarely have contextual archeological value as 
do other objects of cultural heritage, which I fully agree need to be 
preserved and protected.
    3)  The right to private ownership is one of the most important 
rights that we Americans enjoy. However, increasingly this right is 
coming under attack. Ancient coin collecting has been a popular pursuit 
for many centuries. The imposition of import restrictions could 
severely damage the hobby of numismatics and the many small businesses 
in the United States that are based upon it.
    4)  Import restrictions assume incorrectly that it is feasible for 
Customs agents to rely on generic lists to identify coins of Afghani 
origin that require documentation. This places an unreasonable burden 
on importers of coins, which typically lack a provenance as to where 
and when they were found.
    5)  Ancient coins were struck in the uncounted millions or even 
billions and circulated across the known world in antiquity, as well as 
in recent centuries as collectables. Documentation requirements would 
place a severe burden of proof on collectors and potentially cloud the 
title of millions of historical coins that already exist in collectors' 
hands in the United States. International commerce in coins would be 
inhibited due to the fear of unjustified seizure.

    I strongly request your help so that collectors such as myself will 
continue to enjoy and learn from the hobby of collecting ancient coins. 
Please ensure that Congress takes action to see that the issues 
described above are dealt with before this legislation becomes law.
                                                 Dr. Kevin P. Foley

                                 <F-dash>

                                           University of California
                                    Santa Barbara, California 93106
                                                    August 23, 2005
Congressman E. Clay Shaw
Chairman
Subcommittee on Trade of the Committee on Ways and Means
U.S. House of Representatives

Dear Congressman Shaw,

    I am an archaeologist at the University of California Santa 
Barbara. I have been working in the realm of cultural heritage 
conservation in Mesoamerican and in the Maya area, and have a great 
concern for cultural resources around the world.
    I am writing to urge your support for including H.R. 915 Cultural 
Conservation of the Crossroads of Civilization Act (``A bill to 
authorize the President to take certain actions to protect 
archaeological or ethnological materials of Afghanistan'') in 
theMiscellaneous Tariffs bill. This Act grants authority to the 
President to impose emergency import restrictions to prevent the import 
into theUnited States of antiquities and other cultural materials that 
have been illegally removed from Afghan cultural institutions and other 
locations, particularly archaeological sites in Afghanistan. While 
Afghanistan is not the only area I am concerned with it is yet another 
example of the need to protect cultural heritage in situ and is 
important an example of respect for the local value and 
irreparabilityof these antiquities.
    This legislation is necessary because archaeological sites are now 
being looted on a large scale in Afghanistan. The heritage of 
Afghanistan has played an important role in the world's historical and 
cultural development. The looting of sites destroys the historical, 
cultural, religious and scientific information that is derived through 
the careful, systematic excavation of sites. When this record is 
destroyed we are all the poorer for it. Conservation of the cultural 
contexts are critical, removing items as art and displacing their 
context reduces value and importance to local inhabitants and scholars 
alike.
    Looting world wide has taken on terrible proportions. 
Archaeological sites have fallen prey to western interests in art over 
the centuries.The looting of sites and theft from museums in 
Afghanistan have been significant problems for many years. As with 
Iraq, the United Stateshas undertaken a special relationship with 
Afghanistan. Concern for preservation of the cultural heritage of 
Afghanistan must be given equal consideration. We have recognized 
bilateral conventions following the UNESCO conventions on antiquities. 
This will reinforce these global positions. Afghanistan's own 
traditions are at risk and this should not be exacerbated. Sites are 
looted of antiquities so that they can be sold ultimately to markets in 
the developed world, particularly the United States. It is crucial that 
the President be given this authority to prevent the import into the 
United States of looted cultural materials and thereby reduce the 
incentive for theft and destruction of archaeological sites. Enactment 
of this legislation will help the United States to fulfill its 
obligations to the Afghan people and help to enrich our understanding 
of the world's and our own cultural heritage.
                                                    Dr. Anabel Ford

                                 <F-dash>

                                           New York, New York 10025
                                                    August 17, 2005
Congressman E. Clay Shaw
Chairman
Subcommittee on Trade of the Committee on Ways and Means
U.S. House of Representatives

Dear Congressman Shaw,

    I am writing to urge your support for including H.R. 915 Cultural 
Conservation of the Crossroads of Civilization Act (``A bill to 
authorize the President to take certain actions to protect 
archaeological or ethnological materials of Afghanistan'') in the 
Miscellaneous Tariffs bill. This Act grants authority to the President 
to impose emergency import restrictions to prevent the import into the 
United States of antiquities and other cultural materials that have 
been illegally removed from Afghan cultural institutions and other 
locations, particularly archaeological sites in Afghanistan.
    This legislation is necessary because archaeological sites are now 
being looted on a large scale in Afghanistan. The heritage of 
Afghanistan has played an important role in the world's historical and 
cultural development. The looting of sites destroys the historical, 
cultural, religious and scientific information that is derived through 
the careful, systematic excavation of sites. When this record is 
destroyed we are all the poorer for it.
    The looting of sites and theft from museums in Afghanistan have 
been significant problems for many years. As with Iraq, the United 
States has undertaken a special relationship with Afghanistan. Concern 
for preservation of the cultural heritage of Afghanistan must be given 
equal consideration.
    Sites are looted of antiquities so that they can be sold ultimately 
to markets in Western Europe and the United States. It is crucial that 
the President be given this authority to prevent the import into the 
United States of looted cultural materials and thereby reduce the 
incentive for theft and destruction of archaeological sites. Enactment 
of this legislation will help the United States to fulfill its 
obligations to the Afghan people and help to enrich our understanding 
of the world's and our own cultural heritage.
            Sincerely,
                                                      Gregg Gardner

                                 <F-dash>

                    [By permission of the Chairman:]

                                    German Archaeological Institute
                                                       Cairo, Egypt
                                                    August 25, 2005
Congressman E. Clay Shaw
Chairman
Subcommittee on Trade of the Committee on Ways and Means
U.S. House of Representatives

Dear Congressman Shaw,

    I am writing to urge your support for including H.R. 915 Cultural 
Conservation of the Crossroads of Civilization Act (``A bill to 
authorize the President to take certain actions to protect 
archaeological or ethnological materials of Afghanistan'') in the 
Miscellaneous Tariffs bill. This Act grants authority to the President 
to impose emergency import restrictions to prevent the import into the 
United States of antiquities and other cultural materials that have 
been illegally removed from Afghan cultural institutions and other 
locations, particularly archaeological sites in Afghanistan.
    This legislation is necessary because archaeological sites are now 
being looted on a large scale in Afghanistan. The heritage of 
Afghanistan has played an important role in the world's historical and 
cultural development. The looting of sites destroys the historical, 
cultural, religious and scientific information that is derived through 
the careful, systematic excavation of sites. When this record is 
destroyed we are all the poorer for it.
    The looting of sites and theft from museums in Afghanistan have 
been significant problems for many years. As with Iraq, the United 
States has undertaken a special relationship with Afghanistan. Concern 
for preservation of the cultural heritage of Afghanistan must be given 
equal consideration.
    Sites are looted of antiquities so that they can be sold ultimately 
to markets in Western Europe and the United States. It is crucial that 
the President be given this authority to prevent the import into the 
United States of looted cultural materials and thereby reduce the 
incentive for theft and destruction of archaeological sites. Enactment 
of this legislation will help the United States to fulfill its 
obligations to the Afghan people and help to enrich our understanding 
of the world's and our own cultural heritage.
    I am sending you this model letter to avoid any formal mistakes on 
my side. However, I would like to add that as a former associate 
professor of Egyptian Archaeology and History at the University of 
California, Los Angeles, and current associate director of the German 
Archaeological Institute Cairo, I am well aware of the serious damage 
to the world's cultural heritage caused by illicit activities on 
various levels in connection with the international antiquities trade 
and art market. We are facing the results of these illicit activities 
almost daily even in a country like Egypt where there is a well-
organized and efficient national Antiquities Organization. The current 
situation in Afghanistan does not allow such a sufficient control of 
the numerous historical and archaeological sites in that country. 
Civilized nations like the United States of America with the highest 
possible moral and ethic standards are, in my opinion, not only 
supposed to support the preservation of any cultural heritage on this 
planet, they are oblidged to do so.
                                                    Dr. Daniel Polz
                                                 Associate Director

                                 <F-dash>

                                    Castro Valley, California 94552
                                                  September 1, 2005
Congressman E. Clay Shaw
Chairman
Subcommittee on Trade of the Committee on Ways and Means
U.S. House of Representatives

Dear Congressman Shaw,

    I am writing to urge your support for including H.R. 915 Cultural 
Conservation of the Crossroads of Civilization Act (``A bill to 
authorize the President to take certain actions to protect 
archaeological or ethnological materials of Afghanistan'') in the 
Miscellaneous Tariffs bill. This Act grants authority to the President 
to impose emergency import restrictions to prevent the import into the 
United States of antiquities and other cultural materials that have 
been illegally removed from Afghan cultural institutions and other 
locations, particularly archaeological sites in Afghanistan.
    This legislation is necessary because archaeological sites are now 
being looted on a large scale in Afghanistan. The heritage of 
Afghanistan has played an important role in the world's historical and 
cultural development. The looting of sites destroys the historical, 
cultural, religious and scientific information that is derived through 
the careful, systematic excavation of sites. When this record is 
destroyed we are all the poorer for it.
    The looting of sites and theft from museums in Afghanistan have 
been significant problems for many years. As with Iraq, the United 
States has undertaken a special relationship with Afghanistan. Concern 
for preservation of the cultural heritage of Afghanistan must be given 
equal consideration.
    Sites are looted of antiquities so that they can be sold ultimately 
to markets in Western Europe and the United States. It is crucial that 
the President be given this authority to prevent the import into the 
United States of looted cultural materials and thereby reduce the 
incentive for theft and destruction of archaeological sites. Enactment 
of this legislation will help the United States to fulfill its 
obligations to the Afghan people and help to enrich our understanding 
of the world's and our own cultural heritage.
            Sincerely,
                                                      Mostafa Ghous

                                 <F-dash>

                                                          HRA, Inc.
                                           Conservation Archaeology
                                            Henderson, Nevada 89014
                                                    August 17, 2005
Congressman E. Clay Shaw
Chairman
Subcommittee on Trade
Committee on Ways and Means
U.S. House of Representatives

Dear Congressman Shaw,

    My name is Suzanne Eskenazi, and I am an archaeologist working in 
Las Vegas, Nevada. Although most of my work takes place in southern 
Nevada and southwestern Utah, I have always been interested in 
archaeology around the world. The initial spark for my interest in 
archaeology occurred in high school, when I studied the ``fertile 
crescent'' and areas around Afghanistan. I was completely enchanted by 
the ancient civilizations that lived in that region. This is why I am 
contacting you. Recently, it has come to my attention that a bill (H.R. 
915) is soon to be voted on that involves the antiquities of 
Afghanistan.
    I am writing to urge your support for including H.R. 915 Cultural 
Conservation of the Crossroads of Civilization Act (``A bill to 
authorize the President to take certain actions to protect 
archaeological or ethnological materials of Afghanistan'') in the 
Miscellaneous Tariffs bill. This Act grants authority to the President 
to impose emergency import restrictions to prevent the import into the 
United States of antiquities and other cultural materials that have 
been illegally removed from Afghan cultural institutions and other 
locations, particularly archaeological sites in Afghanistan. This 
legislation is necessary because archaeological sites are now being 
looted on a large scale in Afghanistan. The heritage of Afghanistan has 
played an important role in the world's historical and cultural 
development. The looting of sites destroys the historical, cultural, 
religious and scientific information that is derived through the 
careful, systematic excavation of sites. When this record is destroyed 
we are all the poorer for it.
    The looting of sites and theft from museums in Afghanistan have 
been significant problems for many years. As with Iraq, the United 
States has undertaken a special relationship with Afghanistan. Concern 
for preservation of the cultural heritage of Afghanistan must be given 
equal consideration. Sites are looted of antiquities so that they can 
be sold ultimately to markets in Western Europe and the United States. 
It is crucial that the President be given this authority to prevent the 
import into the United States of looted cultural materials and thereby 
reduce the incentive for theft and destruction of archaeological sites. 
Enactment of this legislation will help the United States to fulfill 
its obligations to the Afghan people and help to enrich our 
understanding of the world's and our own cultural heritage.
    Please, help support the bill that will protect stolen artifacts 
from Afghanistan. Thank you.
            Sincerely,
                                  Suzanne B. Eskenazi, M.A., R.P.A.
                                                      Archaeologist

                                 <F-dash>

                               Industry Council for Tangible Assets
                                             Severna Park, Maryland
                                                    August 10, 2005
The Honorable E. Clay Shaw, Jr.
Chairman, Subcommittee on Trade
Committee on Ways & Means
U.S. House of Representatives
1102 Longworth House Office Building
Washington DC 20515

Dear Mr. Chairman:

    I am writing to express my concerns about a piece of legislation 
authorizing import restrictions relating to Afghan artifacts (H.R. 915) 
that appears to be ready to be folded into the Miscellaneous Trade 
Bill. ICTA is the national trade association for the rare coin/precious 
metals/currency industry.
    Congress should exempt coins from any such restrictions. If that is 
not feasible, Congress should refer the matter to the U.S. Cultural 
Property Advisory Committee for consideration or, at the very least, 
severely limit Customs' authority to seize coins without conclusive 
proof that they were illegally removed from Afghan institutions or 
archaeological sites.
    Import restrictions on coins are unnecessary because:

    <bullet>  Coins are not national treasures.
    <bullet>  Coins can only be found easily with metal detectors. 
Regulation of metal detectors is the most effective and fair way of 
dealing with looting of archaeological sites for tiny metal objects 
like coins.

    On the other hand, imposition of import restrictions could severely 
damage the hobby of numismatics and with it the study and preservation 
of historical coins in the U.S.

    <bullet>  Import restrictions wrongly assume that Customs can 
reasonably rely on generic lists of coins that circulated in 
Afghanistan to trigger an importer's obligation to document country of 
origin. However, such an assumption places an impossible burden on 
importers of coins. Coins typically lack a ``provenance.'' It is quite 
unusual to know where or when a specific coin may have been excavated.
    <bullet>  Historical coins were struck in the millions and 
circulated widely in antiquity as hard currency and in more recent 
times as collectibles. Placing the burden of proof on collectors to 
show ``provenance'' could ``cloud the title'' to hundreds of thousands, 
if not millions, of historical coins already in collections here and 
abroad. Such coins could not travel in international commerce without 
fear of unjustified detention and seizure.

    Your assistance in ensuring that Congress take action to ensure 
that the problems described above are dealt with before this 
legislation becomes law will be greatly appreciated.
    ICTA's members would appreciate hearing your position on this issue 
and would be pleased to provide any technical assistance you and the 
Committee might require to assist your deliberations.
            Sincerely,
                                                   Eloise A. Ullman
                                                 Executive Director

                                 <F-dash>

                                                Frankfort, Michigan
                                                    August 29, 2005
Dear Sirs:

    Please do not support H.R. 915, a bill currently under 
consideration in the Trade Subcommittee of the House Ways and Means 
Committee.
    Import restrictions on coins are unnecessary because. Coins are not 
national treasures. Coins were struck in the millions and circulated 
widely in antiquity as hard currency and in more recent times as 
collectables.
    On the other hand, imposition of import restrictions could severely 
damage the hobby of numismatics, and with it the study and preservation 
of historical coins in the U.S.:
    Import restrictions wrongly assume that Customs can reasonably rely 
on generic lists of coins that circulated in Afghanistan to trigger an 
importer's obligation to document country of origin. However, many of 
the coin types that circulated in Afghanistan circulated throughout the 
ancient world. Furthermore, most ancient coins are discovered as 
individual surface finds and typically lack provenance. Allowing 
Customs to demand source documentation would place an impossible burden 
on importers of coins.
    Placing the burden of proof on collectors to show provenance could 
cloud the title to millions of historical coins already in collections 
here and abroad. Such coins could not travel in international commerce 
without fear of unjustified detention and seizure.
    Your assistance in ensuring that Congress takes action to ensure 
that the problems described above are dealt with before this 
legislation becomes law will be greatly appreciated.
            Sincerely,
                                                 Kevin W. Ingleston

                                 <F-dash>

 Statement of Peter K. Tompa, International Association of Professional
  Numismatists, Professional Numismatists Guild, and the Ancient Coin
                           Collectors Guild*
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    *The International Association of Professional Numismatists (IAPN) 
is a nonprofit organization of the leading international numismatic 
firms founded in 1951. The objects of IAPN are the development of a 
healthy and prosperous numismatic trade conducted according to the 
highest standards of business ethics and commercial practice. The IAPN 
has 113 member firms in 21 countries, including 31 in the United 
States. More about the IAPN may be found on the internet at http://
www.iapn-coins.org.
    The Professional Numismatists Guild (PNG) is a nonprofit 
organization founded in 1955. The PNG's motto, ``Knowledge, Integrity, 
and Responsibility'' continues to reflect its aims, and is expressed in 
the strict requirements for election to membership to the PNG. The PNG 
has over 300 members across the United States and abroad. More about 
the PNG may be found on the internet at http://pngdealers.com.
    The Ancient Coin Collectors Guild (ACCG) is a nonprofit 
organization founded in response to efforts to restrict the public's 
right to collect, preserve and study ancient coins. The purposes of the 
ACCG are to promote and nurture the free and independent collecting of 
coins from antiquity through education, political action and consumer 
protection. The ACCG currently has approximately 450 members and 14 
affiliated numismatic clubs. More about the ACCG can be found on the 
internet at http://accg.us/.
    Peter K. Tompa is a partner at Dillingham & Murphy, LLP. Peter K. 
Tompa has collected and studied ancient coins for over 25 years. He 
also has written extensively on the potential impact of cultural 
patrimony laws on coin collecting. Most recently, he is a contributor 
to a chapter on numismatics in Who Owns the Past? Cultural Policy, 
Cultural Property, and the Law (K. Fitz Gibbon ed. Rutgers 2005). He is 
a registered lobbyist for IAPN and PNG who he is representing in this 
matter for a fee as well as a member of the ACCG Board of Directors.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    The International Association of Professional Numismatists 
(``IAPN''), the Professional Numismatists Guild (``PNG'')and the 
Ancient Coin Collectors Guild (``ACCG'') respectfully submit this 
statement in support of common sense measures to protect Afghanistan's 
cultural heritage and against the anti-small business and anti-coin 
collector remedy of ``emergency import restrictions'' authorized under 
the Cultural Conservation of the Crossroads of Civilization Act. By 
their very nature, any import restrictions on coins will not just 
impact trade between the U.S. and Afghanistan. Rather, such 
restrictions could greatly hamper--and thus endanger--all legitimate 
trade in ancient and early modern historical coins that remotely 
``look'' like they may have once circulated in Afghanistan. Given the 
huge potential for damage to the entire international numismatic 
community, any such decision to impose import restrictions pursuant to 
the Act on coins must not be made lightly.
    Afghanistan has suffered greatly from tyranny and war, but has 
there really been a case made that ``emergency import restrictions'' on 
antiquities must be imposed, and if so, will any such prescription make 
the situation better or worse in Afghanistan, and at what cost to the 
small businesses, collectors and academics interested in coins that 
make up the American numismatic community?
    There is a legitimate question why such legislation is really 
necessary. As IAPN and PNG have previously reported, one of the major 
predicates for the legislation--Finding 16 stating that 100% of the 
objects in the Afghan National Museum were ``stolen'' and vandalized--
is simply untrue.\1\ Moreover, it is unclear why Congress is yet again 
being drawn into the philosophical morass associated with the Cultural 
Property Debate \2\ when Afghanistan itself is fully capable of taking 
the steps necessary to request imposition of import restrictions 
utilizing normal diplomatic channels.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \1\ See Letter from Peter K. Tompa to The Hon. Phil English, dated 
March 9, 2005 (copied to the entire House Ways and Means Committee 
Membership) (noting that these reports were already being questioned 
before H.R. 915 was introduced). As set forth in detail in this and in 
the ``ACCG, IAPN and PNG Statement of Facts and Arguments Regarding 
Afghanistan, Coins and H.R. 4641, appended to letter of Arthur L. 
Friedberg, President of IAPN, to Congressman Phil English, dated July 
9, 2004, it is Afghan war lords--some of whom are evidently associated 
with the present Afghan Government--that were responsible for 
destroying the Afghan National Museum and allegedly selling off some as 
yet undetermined amount of its contents. Moreover, the same war lords 
(or tribal leaders) are said to largely control the trade in 
antiquities being excavated in the countryside.
    \2\ What largely was an academic debate over cultural property 
issues between academic archaeologists on one hand and high-end 
antiquities collectors and museum professionals on the other, has now 
spilled over into public policy, impacting a much larger group of 
Americans--like the estimated 50,000 Americans who collect ancient 
coins as well as the small businesses of the numismatic trade. In any 
event, largely influenced by similarly overblown reports of the looting 
of the Iraq National Museum, Congress passed legislation authorizing 
similar ``emergency import restrictions'' on Iraqi cultural goods last 
year.
    \3\ Afghanistan has had a functioning government for some years. 
That government could sign and ratify the UNESCO Treaty which would 
entitle it to make a request for import restrictions under the 
procedures contemplated in the Convention on Cultural Property 
Implementation Act, 19 U.S.C. Sec. Sec. 2601-2613.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    This bill also touches upon larger political issues, sending the 
``wrong message'' to the people we need to really need to influence--
the common citizens of Afghanistan (as opposed to sundry academic 
archaeologists and cultural property bureaucrats). In particular, the 
proposed legislation is ``anti-democratic'' at a time the United States 
is trying to foster democracy and freedom in countries like 
Afghanistan. Coin collectors and dealers support efforts narrowly 
tailored to protect archaeological sites and public and private 
collections in third countries. However, the assumption behind the 
present legislation is that the U.S. should encourage Afghanistan to 
establish the broadest possible controls on any item that it deems 
``old.'' Such a rule is wholly inappropriate for budding democracy and, 
indeed, harkens back to the dark days of Afghanistan's previous 
Communist and Taliban regimes.
    In any event, Congress should not take the precipitous step of 
authorizing ``emergency import restrictions''--particularly ones 
including coins--without granting the U.S. numismatic community a full 
opportunity to be heard at Congressional hearings or before the U.S. 
Cultural Property Advisory Committee (``CPAC''), the body normally 
charged with advising the President on such matters. In the absence of 
being provided such an opportunity, IAPN, PNG and ACCG respectfully 
request that the House Ways and Means Subcommittee on Trade consider 
the following facts and suggestions before incorporating the Cultural 
Conservation of the Crossroads of Civilization Act into the 
Miscellaneous Trade Bill.
    A. Congress Should Be Supportive of Private Efforts to Preserve, 
Study and Display Ancient Coins--Collecting Fosters Appreciation of 
Afghan Culture and There Are Far Too Many Ancient Coins Extant to Be 
Sole Preserve of Sundry Archaeologists and Cultural Property 
Bureaucrats.

    <bullet>  Numismatists Care About Coins; Archaeologists Only Care 
About ``Context.'' Numismatics, the study of coins, began in the 
Renaissance. Numismatics predates archaeology by several centuries. 
Unlike archaeologists, numismatists treat coins as far more than a 
means to the limited end of dating archaeological sites.\4\ Instead, 
numismatists have interpreted coins as part of a larger political, 
military and economic context of the society which issued them. Indeed, 
much of what we know about the Greek kingdoms of ancient Afghanistan 
derives from the study of their coins. Moreover, unlike archaeologists, 
numismatists also have accepted the obligation to preserve, popularize 
and display their coins. The obsession of many archaeologists solely 
with the context in which an object is found has all too often meant 
that common artifacts like coins are either sacrificed in the process 
of dating archaeological stratum or left to deteriorate in poor storage 
conditions once they serve that limited purpose.\5\ If anything, 
archaeologists are far more detrimental to coins than coin collectors 
are to preservation of the archaeological record.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \4\ Archaeologists frequently see coins as little more than just 
one tool to date archaeological sites, and treat them accordingly. See 
e.g., John Casey, Understanding Ancient Coins: An Introduction for 
Archaeologists and Historians 7 (B.T. Batsford 1986) (``An 
archaeologist was heard to remark that `Coins are only well dated 
pieces of metal.' He was of course wrong: coins are not usually well 
dated nor are they necessarily of metal. But these small technical 
points aside, the drift of the comment well reflects the place coin 
studies have occupied in the archaeological world. Coins are perceived 
as dating evidence, as art objects and as unique species of evidence 
that is best left to the numismatist and confined to the museum strong 
room at the earliest possible moment. It is the purpose of this short 
book to bring to the attention of archaeologists and historians 
something of the full potential of coin evidence.'').
    \5\ See Frank L. Holt, Thundering Zeus: The Making of Hellenistic 
Bactria 109 (University of California Press 1999) (``Even some 
advocates of the `New Archaeology,' which treats every shred of 
evidence (even stray seeds and splinters) with utmost care, seem all 
too willing to sacrifice bronze coins. At Kourion, for example, the 
excavation director speaks of a `power struggle' over the handling of 
stray coins: `I needed the coins cleaned as soon as possible for 
purposes of dating and identification; but the conservators, as is 
their wont, lobbied for the safest and slowest methods. The reader will 
perhaps not be surprised to learn that the dig director won out, 
particularly since the coins were hardly art treasures, and were in 
very bad shape.' Bronze coins have long been valued as chronological 
indicators and little more; old habits die hard.''); Peter K. Tompa 
(unattributed author), ``Mary Washington College Presents Symposium,'' 
American Numismatic Society Magazine 8, 10 (Spring 2002) (noting that 
the common view that coins are only valuable as evidence for dating 
archaeological strata and not as objects in themselves probably helps 
explain why there are so few site publications, why find spots are not 
always recorded, and why smaller coins are not even recovered.).

    <bullet>  Ancient Coins as a Class are Extremely Common. Coins 
reached Afghanistan in the 5th C. BC when it was a province of the 
Achaemenid Empire of Iran. (Primary Source: J. Cribb, B. Cook and I. 
Carradice, The Coin Atlas 163-167 (MacDonald & Co. 1990)). Early issues 
of the Greek and Persian cities of the Eastern Mediterranean circulated 
based on their value as precious metal (bullion). Some of the first 
coins that circulated in the area included Athenian Tetradrachms. These 
large silver coins, weighing approximately 17 grams, bear a depiction 
of the Goddess Athena on the obverse, and her familiar, the Owl, on the 
reverse. Persian governors (satraps) struck copies of these ``Owls'' 
before Alexander conquered the area in 329 BC. Alexander's successors 
struck coins in Bactria (Northern Afghanistan). Many issues are notable 
for their fine portraiture. Since that time, coins were struck in what 
is now Afghanistan by the Mauryan Empire, the Kushan Empire, the White 
Huns, the Turks, the Mongols, and the Savids. Millions of such coins 
circulated throughout Central Asia, Pakistan and parts of India. In 
addition, ``foreign'' coins, like those issued by the Sassanian 
Persians and Romans, also circulated in the area by the thousands upon 
thousands. In this regard, it is important to note ancient mintages 
could be quite large. For example, ``Francois de Callatay [a Belgian 
scholar] has calculated that 28,000,000 Alexander [the Great] drachms 
were produced in Asia Minor down to 300 B.C.E.; Martin Price [a British 
scholar] more than doubled that estimate for this single denomination 
in one region of the empire.'' (Frank Holt, Alexander the Great and the 
Mystery of the Elephant Medallions 140 (University of California Press 
2003).) Indeed, historical coins are so numerous with millions of 
examples extant that stewardship of the world's numismatic heritage 
requires interested members of the public to collect, study, conserve 
record and publish historical coins both individually and collectively 
through membership in and support of organizations such as the American 
Numismatic Association and the American Numismatic Society.
    <bullet>  Coins are not National Treasures. Ancient coins struck in 
Afghanistan have been widely collected and traded by Westerners since 
at least the early 1800's.\6\ Even in recent times, the Afghan 
government did not treat coins as national treasures. In the pre-
Communist era (before1978), ancient coins were sold openly in antiques 
shops on Chicken Street and Pakistani Embassy Street in Kabul. Traders 
would also sell thousands of coins in parks where they would be 
displayed on rugs. Tribal leaders, militia commanders and local people 
who continue to sell coins presumably believe that they are only 
following that tradition.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \6\ English gentlemen who served with the British colonial 
administration in India formed many notable collections. As early as 
1832, British adventurer Charles Masson began collecting coins in 
Afghanistan. (Elizabeth Errington, Discovering Ancient Afghanistan, The 
Masson Collection, Minerva Vol. 13 No. 6 at 53 (Nov./Dec. 2002). Masson 
himself estimated that he collected some 60,000 coins during his 
travels in the country from 1833-1838. (Id.) English collector/scholars 
also included Dr. Richard Bertram Whitehead (1879-1967). His Notes on 
Indo-Greek Numismatics (reprinted in Whitehead, Indo-Greek Numismatics 
(Argonaut 1969)), gives some sense of the collector spirit of the time, 
``I record some general observations, based on my sixteen years' 
experience as an active collector in the Punjab, on the position and 
extent of the dominions of the Bactrian Greeks in India under Heliocles 
and his successors, as deduced more especially from the find spots, 
distribution, and monograms of their coins.'' (Id. at 294.) Americans 
also have long enjoyed collecting, studying and preserving coin types 
that circulated in the area of modern Afghanistan. A number of 
prominent American collectors bought ancient coins in Afghanistan 
during its heyday as a tourist destination in the 1960's and early 
1970's. Of course, coins of the type that circulated in Afghanistan 
have also been available for purchase in the U.S. for many decades. For 
example, a noted collection formed primarily in the 1940's and 1950's 
by Archaeological Institute of America Trustee and American Numismatic 
Society Council Member Arthur Dewing contained examples of coins issued 
by Greco-Bactrian and Indo-Scythian rulers. (Leo Mildenberg and Silvia 
Hurter, The Arthur S. Dewing Collection Nos. 2716-2731 (ANS 1985).)

    B. Congress Should Consider the Practical Problems Associated with 
the Proposed Legislation--Particularly to the Small Business of the 
Numismatic Trade--Before Making a Grand But Inherently Flawed Statement 
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
in Support of Preservation of Afghanistan's Cultural Heritage.

    <bullet>  The Import Restrictions Authorized in H.R. 915 are Anti-
Small Business. The House recently passed H. Res. 22 calling for a 
``Small Business Bill of Rights,'' but H.R. 915 is profoundly troubling 
on a practical, business related level to the small businesses that 
comprise the numismatic trade. In particular, the suggested remedy of 
import restrictions is grossly overbroad and can only lead to an import 
ban on any coin type deemed to have possibly come from Afghanistan. In 
fact, import restrictions presuppose that a coin was in Afghanistan in 
the first place when in all likelihood the truth is the opposite. The 
bill supposedly aims to fight looting of archaeological sites in 
Afghanistan, but it does so by authorizing U.S. Customs to seize coins 
entering the United States from third countries solely because they 
``look'' similar to like kind items on a Department of State/U.S. 
Customs web site. In order to avoid detention and seizure, any small 
business importing coins will be required to certify: (1) that the coin 
in question (a) left Afghanistan before imposition of import 
restrictions; or (b) left Afghanistan accompanied by an export 
certificate. This burden is simply an impossible one for the small 
businesses of the numismatic trade to meet. Coins that circulated in 
Afghanistan cannot be distinguished from those that circulated in 
Northern India, Pakistan, Central Asia or elsewhere. Now placing the 
burden of proof on collectors, coin dealers, and museums to show 
``provenance'' could, therefore, ``cloud the title'' to hundreds of 
thousands, if not millions, of historical coins already in collections 
here and abroad. Such coins could not travel in international commerce 
without fear of unjustified detention and seizure.
    <bullet>  The Rationale for H.R. 915 Rests on a Falsehood. One of 
the major predicates for the bill's ``emergency import restrictions'' 
is the claim at Finding 16 that, ``100 percent of the objects [from the 
Kabul National Museum] were stolen and vandalized.'' However, it has 
long been reported that most of the important items thought to be 
missing from the Afghan National Museum (including coins) have in fact 
been found in excellent condition. (See National Geographic News: 
Afghan Gold Treasures Photo Gallery (http://
news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2004/11/photogalleries/
afghan_treasure/photo3.html)(picture of Greco-Bactrian coins, 
captioned, ``These ten silver Greco-Bactrian coins are part of the 
nearly 2,000 silver and gold coins recovered in a National Geographic 
project. The coins are among the many Afghan museum artifacts saved 
from 25 years of war and political upheaval.'')). It is indeed 
unfortunate that such erroneous information continues to be used as the 
predicate for passage of this legislation.
    <bullet>  The Proposed Legislation Will Do Nothing to Discourage 
Looting. Restrictions on the import of coins into the United States 
will not impact any looting in Afghanistan because they will not 
diminish the power of war lords (many of whom are also members of the 
Afghan Government) who control the trade or the destitution of farmers, 
who sell artifacts they find in order to help them survive in one of 
the poorest countries on earth. Nor will import restrictions enforced 
by U.S. Customs impact the market in Pakistan where Afghan coins are 
sold freely with those found locally. Even if restrictions make coins 
worthless as collectibles (as the proponents of restrictions hope) it 
will only encourage destitute Afghans to melt them down as bullion to 
recover their metallic value.\7\ No one--not even archaeologists or 
cultural property bureaucrats-- would be served by such a result.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \7\ In that part of the world, old coins are likely to be melted 
for their bullion value if they are not saved by numismatists. See 
e.g., Osmund Bopearachchi & Klaus Grigo, ``Thundering Zeus Revisited,'' 
169 Oriental Numismatic Society Newsletter 22 (Autumn 2001) (noting 
that numismatists were only able to save approximately 70 coins from a 
hoard of Bactrian gold coins found in India after a jeweler had melted 
some of the coins.).

    C. Congress Should Focus on Common Sense Measures that Foster 
Appreciation of Afghanistan's Culture Both Here and in Afghanistan 
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Itself.

    <bullet>  The Subcommittee Should Limit Import Restrictions to 
Items of Undeniable Cultural Significance. Congress should reject the 
underlying assumptions behind overbroad import restrictions that 
anything ``old'' automatically should be considered property of a 
foreign state, that any artifact without a demonstrable ``provenance'' 
(``chain of custody'') must be considered ``stolen,'' and that only a 
limited number of archaeologists or foreign museum specialists should 
be allowed to study and preserve remnants of the past. Instead, 
Congress should only authorize import restrictions on items of 
undeniable cultural significance and not common items that exist in 
millions of examples like coins.
    <bullet>  The Subcommittee Should Investigate Other Less Onerous 
Measures. Congress should help Afghan officials explore more effective, 
and far less onerous means to protect the archaeological record, 
including better policing of archaeological sites, public education 
programs, reasonable regulation of the sale and use of metal detectors, 
and passage of fair laws that encourage members of the public in source 
countries to report their finds with the prospect of a monetary reward.
      <bullet>  Congress Should Help Afghanistan Set Up a Web Site to 
Publicize Such Items That Remain Lost From the Afghan National Museum. 
It is our understanding that most, if not all, of the most important 
artifacts from the Afghan National Museum survived the Afghan Civil War 
and Taliban rule despite prior, highly exaggerated reports to the 
contrary. In any event, the best way to track down any items that may 
remain missing from the Afghan National Museum is to construct a 
comprehensive web site of these items that can be publicized to members 
of the legitimate international antiquities trade. Such a web site 
would encourage voluntary returns of any items still missing from the 
Afghan National Museum without resort to draconian legislation based on 
the erroneous assumption that objects without a known provenance must 
be ``stolen.''
      <bullet>  Congress Should Encourage Afghan Authorities to Adopt a 
Law Like the United Kingdom's Treasure Act. Protecting sites is more 
complex, but the best antidote to looting is the institution of a fair 
system akin to the British Treasure Act. This is a reporting system 
that awards finder fair value for items the state wants to retain for 
its national collections. Other items are returned to the finder after 
being recorded. Costs of such a system should be minimal, particularly 
in places like Afghanistan where impoverished farmers will most likely 
accept small amounts of money in return for such artifacts as they 
find. In the United Kingdom, this law has been judged a success because 
it recognizes that archaeologists and the state are not the only 
parties with legitimate interests.\8\ In particular, the Treasure Act 
provides state museums a right of first refusal, finders with the 
prospect of a reward based on fair market value, dealers and collectors 
with the prospect of access to coins with a demonstrable provenance, 
and archaeologists with reports on finds that may lead to the discovery 
of otherwise unknown archaeological sites. Efforts should be made to at 
least explore whether a version of this law may work in Afghanistan.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \8\ For a critique of the elitism inherent in the present system of 
international cultural property laws, see John Henry Merryman, Cultural 
Property Internationalism 12 International J. of Cul. Prop.11 (2005). 
For a description of the success of the Treasure Act, see e.g., Peter 
A. Clayton, ``Treasure: Finding our Past,'' Vol. 15 No. 1 Minerva 8 
(2004) (discussing success of Treasure Act); ``Arts Minister Estelle 
Morris Welcomes Further Rise in Number of Treasure Finds and Says 
Figure Likely to Reach 500 in 2004,'' Department for Culture, Media and 
Sport Press Notices 142/04 (October 26, 2004) (``We've all dreamed of 
uncovering hidden history, from ancient deeds in our attics to Saxon 
gold in our gardens. Between them, the Treasure Report and the Portable 
Antiquities Scheme report, which covers 47,000 items found by the 
public last year, provide a comprehensive record of the public's most 
recent discoveries-from the everyday to the truly extraordinary.''). 
For an eloquent plea to Italy to adopt a law akin to the Treasure Act 
and the complimentary ``Portable Antiquities Scheme,'' see Anna Somers 
Cocks, ``Make the Citizen Your Ally if You Want to Save the Nation's 
Past,'' The Art Newspaper 26 (Feb. 2005) (``It is many years since 
archaeology has been principally a treasure hunt. Now that the real 
treasure is information, and the finds, once recorded could 
theoretically anywhere in the world without damaging the patrimony of 
their find country and our global heritage.''). While it might be 
suggested that Afghanistan could ill-afford such a system, the costs in 
the ``First World'' United Kingdom have been minimal (&#8356; 1.3 
million in 2003 according to Anna Somers Cocks), and must be contrasted 
with very considerable costs in forcing compliance in addition to the 
more difficult to calculate ``psychic'' costs associated with the ill-
will tough antiquities legislation may generate both in Afghanistan and 
here in the United States.

      <bullet>  At a Minimum, the Following Modifications Should be 
Made to the Legislation. The concerns of coin collectors and coin 
dealers can only be fully addressed with a ``coin exemption'' that 
recognizes that there are simply too many historical coins circulating 
world wide to be considered items of ``cultural significance'' for 
which import restrictions are appropriate.\9\ Failing that IAPN, PNG 
and ACCG suggest the following modifications to H.R. 915:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \9\ After a meeting with Congressmen English and Leach in July 
2003, the numismatic community received the commitment of both 
Congressmen to press for a ``coin exemption'' in the bill they were 
sponsoring on Iraqi antiquities. How this commitment was forgotten and 
replaced with a bill that specifically authorizes import restrictions 
on coins has raised considerable concern and disappointment within the 
numismatic community. See e.g., B. Deisher, ``Lawmaker Turns Blind Eye 
to Truth,'' Coin World 10 (March 21, 2005).

      <bullet>  Factual findings 15-17 should be deleted in favor of a 
more accurate statement concerning the justification for the proposed 
legislation.
      <bullet>  Meaningful review of any proposed import restrictions 
by the Cultural Property Advisory Committee should be preserved.
      <bullet>  Any specific reference that can be taken as a ``green 
light'' to impose import restrictions on coins should be deleted.
      <bullet>  The definition of ``archaeological or ethnological 
material of Afghanistan'' must be modified to make clear that import 
restrictions can only be imposed on archaeological objects of clear 
``cultural significance'' that are at least 250 years old, and objects 
of ethnological interest that are considered ``important to the 
cultural heritage of a people because of their distinctive 
characteristics, comparative rarity, or contribution to the knowledge 
of the origins, development, or history of that people.''
      <bullet>  U.S. Customs should be directed to only to enforce 
restrictions on items where there is a ``reasonable suspicion'' that an 
item was illegally removed from Afghanistan and such reasonable 
suspicion cannot solely rest on the fact that an item being imported 
bears a resemblance to a type of item known to have come from 
Afghanistan.

                                 <F-dash>

                                                 Oxford, Ohio 45056
                                                  September 2, 2005
Congressman E. Clay Shaw
Chairman
Subcommittee on Trade of the Committee on Ways and Means
U.S. House of Representatives

Dear Congressman Shaw,

    I am writing to urge your support for including H.R. 915 in the 
Miscellaneous Tariffs Bill. Afghanistan benefits from being know as the 
crossroads of civilizations. This is where Alexander the Great defeated 
Darius III, and marched his army through the Kunar Valley to reach 
India, and houses the Silk Road which brought Roman glass and Chinese 
lacquer. I could keep making a longer list of the events that have 
happened in this country. To have such a history is a great achievement 
to a country. Would you be happy if people smuggled American artifacts 
to Europe and displayed them there or sold them for pocket change? I 
don't think so; you would want these artifacts and objects to e safe in 
a museum and to educate our population. Afghanistan is no different. 
They wish to have their works of art exhibited for their people as 
well. Afghanistan has suffered enough with the burning of their museums 
stealing of artifacts, we should not let looters think what they are 
doing is right. With the passing of this legislation we will have 
started a trend to stop the pillaging of country's histories.
    Please help us save the past for our future, thank you.
            Yours sincerely,
                                                    Christine Jauch

                                 <F-dash>

                                                     Vassar College
                                       Poughkeepsie, New York 12604
                                                    August 23, 2005
Congressman E. Clay Shaw
Chairman
Subcommittee on Trade
Committee on Ways and Means
U.S. House of Representatives

Dear Congressman Shaw,

    I am an archaeologist and professor, and one of my most important 
tasks is teaching young people the importance of ethical behavior in 
all that they do, both in their daily lives and in their archaeological 
endeavors.
    I am writing to urge your support for including H.R. 915 Cultural 
Conservation of the Crossroads of Civilization Act (``A bill to 
authorize the President to take certain actions to protect 
archaeological or ethnological materials of Afghanistan'') in the 
Miscellaneous Tariffs bill. This Act grants authority to the President 
to impose emergency import restrictions to prevent the import into the 
United States of antiquities and other cultural materials that have 
been illegally removed from Afghan cultural institutions and other 
locations, particularly archaeological sites in Afghanistan.
    This legislation is necessary because archaeological sites are now 
being looted on a large scale in Afghanistan. The heritage of 
Afghanistan has played an important role in the world's historical and 
cultural development. The looting of sites destroys the historical, 
cultural, religious and scientific information that is derived through 
the careful, systematic excavation of sites. When this record is 
destroyed we are all the poorer for it.
    The looting of sites and theft from museums in Afghanistan have 
been significant problems for many years. As with Iraq, the United 
States has undertaken a special relationship with Afghanistan. Concern 
for preservation of the cultural heritage of Afghanistan must be given 
equal consideration.
    Sites are looted of antiquities so that they can be sold ultimately 
to markets in Western Europe and the United States. It is crucial that 
the President be given this authority to prevent the import into the 
United States of looted cultural materials and thereby reduce the 
incentive for theft and destruction of archaeological sites. Enactment 
of this legislation will help the United States to fulfill its 
obligations to the Afghan people and help to enrich our understanding 
of the world's and our own cultural heritage.
    Please support this legislation and show our students that not only 
they, but also their government, can act in ethically responsible ways.
            Sincerely,
                                              Lucille Lewis Johnson
                                          Professor of Anthropology

                                 <F-dash>

                                           Encino, California 91436
                                                  September 1, 2005
Congressman E. Clay Shaw
Chairman
Subcommittee on Trade of the Committee on Ways and Means
U.S. House of Representatives

Dear Congressman Shaw,

    I am writing to urge your support for including H.R. 915 Cultural 
Conservation of the Crossroads of Civilization Act (``A bill to 
authorize the President to take certain actions to protect 
archaeological or ethnological materials of Afghanistan'') in the 
Miscellaneous Tariffs bill. This Act grants authority to the President 
to impose emergency import restrictions to prevent the import into the 
United States of antiquities and other cultural materials that have 
been illegally removed from Afghan cultural institutions and other 
locations, particularly archaeological sites in Afghanistan. This 
legislation is necessary because archaeological sites are now being 
looted on a large scale in Afghanistan. The heritage of Afghanistan has 
played an important role in the world's historical and cultural 
development. The looting of sites destroys the historical, cultural, 
religious and scientific information that is derived through the 
careful, systematic excavation of sites. When this record is destroyed 
we are all the poorer for it.
    The looting of sites and theft from museums in Afghanistan have 
been significant problems for many years. As with Iraq, the United 
States has undertaken a special relationship with Afghanistan. Concern 
for preservation of the cultural heritage of Afghanistan must be given 
equal consideration.
    Sites are looted of antiquities so that they can be sold ultimately 
to markets in Western Europe and the United States. It is crucial that 
the President be given this authority to prevent the import into the 
United States of looted cultural materials and thereby reduce the 
incentive for theft and destruction of archaeological sites. Enactment 
of this legislation will help the United States to fulfill its 
obligations to the Afghan people and help to enrich our understanding 
of the world's and our own cultural heritage.
            Sincerely,
                                                    Matthew Johnson

                                 <F-dash>

                                         Bloomington, Indiana 47405
                                                    August 23, 2005
Congressman E. Clay Shaw
Chairman
Subcommittee on Trade of the Committee on Ways and Means
U.S. House of Representatives

Dear Congressman Shaw,

    I am writing to urge your support for including H.R. 915 Cultural 
Conservation of the Crossroads of Civilization Act (``A bill to 
authorize the President to take certain actions to protect 
archaeological or ethnological materials of Afghanistan'') in the 
Miscellaneous Tariffs bill. This Act grants authority to the President 
to impose emergency import restrictions to prevent the import into the 
United States of antiquities and other cultural materials that have 
been illegally removed from Afghan

cultural institutions and other locations, particularly archaeological 
sites in Afghanistan.
    This legislation is necessary because archaeological sites are now 
being looted on a large scale in Afghanistan. The heritage of 
Afghanistan has played an important role in the world's historical and 
cultural development. The looting of sites destroys the historical, 
cultural, religious and scientific information that is derived through 
the careful, systematic excavation of sites. When this record is 
destroyed we are all the poorer for it.
    The looting of sites and theft from museums in Afghanistan have 
been significant problems for many years. As with Iraq, the United 
States has undertaken a special relationship with Afghanistan. Concern 
for preservation of the cultural heritage of Afghanistan must be given 
equal consideration.
    Sites are looted of antiquities so that they can be sold ultimately 
to markets in Western Europe and the United States. It is crucial that 
the President be given this authority to prevent the import into the 
United States of looted cultural materials and thereby reduce the 
incentive for theft and destruction of archaeological sites. Enactment 
of this legislation will help the United States to fulfill its 
obligations to the Afghan people and help to enrich our understanding 
of the world's and our own cultural heritage.
            Sincerely,
                                                          Erin Kuns
                                                      PhD Candidate
                                                 Indiana University

                                 <F-dash>

              Lawyers' Committee for Cultural Heritage Preservation
                                                  Chicago, IL 60604
                                                  September 1, 2005
The Honorable E. Clay Shaw, Jr.
Chairman
Subcommittee on Trade, Committee on Ways and Means
U.S. House of Representatives
1102 Longworth House Office Building
Washington DC 20515

Dear Chairman Shaw:

    I am submitting this letter on behalf of myself and the Lawyers' 
Committee for Cultural Heritage Preservation \1\ in support of the 
inclusion of H.R. 915, Cultural Conservation of the Crossroads of 
Civilization Act (``A bill to authorize the President to take certain 
actions to protect archaeological or ethnological materials of 
Afghanistan''), in the Miscellaneous Tariffs bill. This bill grants the 
authority to the President to impose emergency import restrictions 
under the Convention on Cultural Property Implementation Act (CPIA) to 
prevent the import into the United States of antiquities and other 
cultural materials that have been illegally removed from the cultural 
institutions and archaeological sites of Afghanistan.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \1\ The Lawyers' Committee for Cultural Heritage Preservation is an 
association of lawyers who have joined together to promote the 
preservation and protection of cultural heritage resources in the 
United States and internationally through education and advocacy. I am 
Professor of Law at DePaul University College of Law and Director of 
its Arts and Cultural Heritage Program.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Afghanistan was the Central Asian crossroads and part of the Silk 
route throughout much of ancient and medieval history and thus is the 
location of sites and monuments of the Hellenistic, Gandharan, and 
Persian, as well as Islamic, cultures. Afghanistan is perhaps best 
known for the fusion of Ancient Greek and Indian cultures, which 
produced its own distinctive artistic style. Afghanistan's cultural 
repositories and archaeological sites have suffered extensively since 
the 1970s--at the hands of Soviet occupiers, the mujahedeen, the 
Taliban and general lawlessness and lack of effective civil authority. 
The Kabul museum was attacked and looted numerous times. Despite the 
routing of the Taliban in late 2001, Afghanistan's archaeological sites 
and other cultural monuments outside of the main cities remain 
vulnerable to looting and, in fact, are being looted on a considerable 
scale.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \2\ For the history of archaeology in Afghanistan and the impact of 
war on Afghan cultural heritage over the past twenty-five years, see 
Abdul Wasey Feroozi, The Impact of War upon Afghanistan's Cultural 
Heritage, Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the Archaeological 
Institute of America, January 3, 2004, available at: http://
www.archaeological.org/pdfs/papers/AIA_Afghanistan_address_lowres.pdf 
(detailing with photographs the looting at such Afghan sites as Ai 
Khanum, Balkh, Tepe Zargaran, Robatak, Samangan-Haibak, and Surkh 
Kotal).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Archaeological sites are composed of layers of soil, each 
containing a complex of artifacts, architectural remains, and floral 
and faunal remains. Each layer represents a specific time period in the 
history of the site and in human history. When a site is scientifically 
excavated, each layer with all its associated remains can be 
reconstructed to give a full picture of ancient life at a particular 
time. Similar time capsules are represented by burials, which often 
contain human remains and burial goods and can convey information about 
religious customs and beliefs, economic status, health, and gender 
roles. However, when a site is looted to obtain those artifacts prized 
for sale on the international art market, this archaeological context 
is forever lost, fragile remains are destroyed, and our ability to 
fully reconstruct and understand the past is permanently diminished. 
When sites are looted to obtain artifacts for sale on the international 
market, those artifacts that are not desired by the market or those 
that are incomplete are often discarded.
    In 1983, the United States Congress enacted the Convention on 
Cultural Property Implementation Act, 19 U.S.C. Sec. Sec. 2601-13 
(CPIA), implementing our ratification of the 1970 UNESCO Convention on 
the Means of Prohibiting and Preventing the Illicit Import, Export and 
Transfer of Ownership of Cultural Property and recognizing that the 
international trade in often looted archaeological objects contributes 
significantly to the destruction of archaeological sites, the 
irretrievable loss of scientific, cultural, and artistic information, 
and the impoverishment of our and the world's historical record. When 
Congress enacted and President Reagan signed the CPIA into law, the 
Senate Report that accompanied the CPIA stated:
    The expanding worldwide trade in objects of archaeological and 
ethnological interest has led to wholesale depredations in some 
countries, resulting in the mutilation of ceremonial centers and 
archaeological complexes of ancient civilizations and the removal of 
stone sculptures and reliefs. . . . The destruction of such sites and 
the disappearance of the historic records evidenced by the articles 
found in them has given rise to a profound national interest in joining 
other countries to control the trafficking of such articles in 
international commerce.
Senate Report No. 97-564.
    The CPIA, in part, created a mechanism by which other nations that 
are party to the Convention can request that the United States impose 
import restrictions on designated categories of archaeological and 
ethnological materials. Such materials cannot enter the United States 
unless they have been legally exported from their country of origin or 
left the country of origin before the effective date of the import 
restrictions. The process by which the determination is made to impose 
such restrictions is lengthy and burdensome to the requesting nation. 
In addition, in order to submit a request for import restrictions, the 
requesting nation must be a party to the 1970 Convention.
    Afghanistan has not yet ratified the Convention and has therefore 
been unable to bring such a request to the United States, despite the 
significant looting of archaeological sites. The political stability 
that Afghanistan had enjoyed under a centrist monarchy was shattered in 
1973 when the monarchy was overthrown and decades of political chaos 
ensued. During this period, it was impossible for Afghanistan to 
fulfill the requirements for ratifying the Convention. Following 
establishment of President Karzai's government, Afghanistan has been 
progressing toward ratification, but this has required, among other 
time-consuming tasks, the writing of new laws. Even once Afghanistan 
ratifies the Convention, it would have to prepare a request with 
supporting documentation, which would likely require several years, 
unless H.R. 915 is enacted into law.
    This legislation will allow the President to exercise his authority 
under the CPIA to impose import restrictions on Afghan cultural 
materials that have been looted and illegally removed from Afghanistan. 
It would also eliminate the requirements that Afghanistan first ratify 
the Convention and that Afghanistan submit a request to the United 
States.
    I and the Lawyers Committee for Cultural Heritage Preservation 
strongly support this legislation because it will provide a quick and 
effective means of reducing the incentive to loot archaeological sites 
and museums. In this way, the United States will be helping to fulfill 
our special responsibilities to Afghanistan and to preserve the world's 
cultural heritage. I and the Lawyers' Committee would be happy to 
provide any technical assistance you or the Committee may wish in 
enacting this legislation.
                                                 Patty Gerstenblith
                                            Professor and President

                                 <F-dash>
                                    The College of William and Mary
                                             Williamsburg, VA 23185
                                                    August 26, 2005
Congressman E. Clay Shaw
Chairman
Subcommittee on Trade of the Committee on Ways and Means
U.S. House of Representatives

Dear Congressman Shaw,

    I am writing to urge your support for including H.R. 915 Cultural 
Conservation of the Crossroads of Civilization Act (``A bill to 
authorize the President to take certain actions to protect 
archaeological or ethnological materials of Afghanistan'') in the 
Miscellaneous Tariffs bill. This Act grants authority to the President 
to impose emergency import restrictions to prevent the import into the 
United States of antiquities and other cultural materials that have 
been illegally removed from Afghan cultural institutions and other 
locations, particularly archaeological sites in Afghanistan. This 
legislation is necessary because archaeological sites are now being 
looted on a large scale in Afghanistan. The heritage of Afghanistan has 
played an important role in the world's historical and cultural 
development. The looting of sites destroys the historical, cultural, 
religious and scientific information that is derived through the 
careful, systematic excavation of sites. When this record is destroyed 
we are all the poorer for it.
    I feel particularly strongly about this issue as a professional 
archaeologist. I have lived outside of the United States for a number 
of years during my education and work and I know that American scholars 
are often looked to as representatives of their country both by the 
scholarly and local communities in the countries where we carry out our 
work. We are often asked questions about United States political policy 
as it pertains to preserving and maintaining the culture and history of 
our host countries. It is vital to the future of both the United States 
and the rest of world to think beyond present events to ensure the 
preservation of the extant remains of past world cultures. As an 
archaeologist who is an American I know that we need to acknowledge and 
celebrate the cultural heritage of other countries both for the general 
edification of current and future populations, and so that we may 
maintain the relationships that enable Americans to be in the forefront 
of advances in all areas of scholarship.
    The looting of sites and theft from museums in Afghanistan have 
been significant problems for many years. As with Iraq, the United 
States has undertaken a special relationship with Afghanistan. Concern 
for preservation of the cultural heritage of Afghanistan must be given 
equal consideration.
    Sites are looted of antiquities so that they can be sold ultimately 
to markets in Western Europe and the United States. It is crucial that 
the President be given this authority to prevent the import into the 
United States of looted cultural materials and thereby reduce the 
incentive for theft and destruction of archaeological sites. Enactment 
of this legislation will help the United States to fulfill its 
obligations to the Afghan people and help to enrich our understanding 
of the world's and our own cultural heritage.
                                                       Shawna Leigh
                                       Visiting Assistant Professor

                                 <F-dash>

                    [By permission of the Chairman.]

                                                    Gteborg, Sweden
                                                  September 1, 2005
Congressman E. Clay Shaw
Chairman
Subcommittee on Trade of the Committee on Ways and Means
U.S. House of Representatives

Dear Congressman Shaw,

    I am writing to urge your support for including H.R. 915 Cultural 
Conservation of the Crossroads of Civilization Act (``A bill to 
authorize the President to take certain actions to protect 
archaeological or ethnological materials of Afghanistan'') in

the Miscellaneous Tariffs bill. As an archaeologist I am concerned 
about the destruction of archaeological sites in Afghanistan which is 
fuelled by market demand in Western countries, including the United 
States.
    I would like to point out that not only our common heritage is a 
victim of the looting and illicit trade. It also takes a toll of human 
lives. For example, in 2004 it was reported that four police officers 
were murdered when dispatched to protect an archaeological site.
    (D. van der Schriek ``Warlords loot Afghanstan's cultural heritage 
with impunity'' Eurasia Insight, 10/08/04.) The article mentions that 
local war lords fund their armies through antiquities smuggling.
    I would also like to draw to your attention to that the illicit 
antiquities trade may also have been used to fund terrorism. This 
summer it was reported that the police investigation in Germany on the 
terrorist cell in Hamburg had revealed that Muhammed Atta, allegedly 
the pilot of one of the planes which crashed into World Trade Center, 
had approached a German art historian to ask for advice on how to sell 
``valuable antiquities'' from Afghanistan. According to the art 
historian, Atta had mentioned that ``he wanted to purchase an 
aircraft''.
    It is not known, and will probably never be known, whether Atta 
actually proceeded with his plans to sell antiquities, nor is it known 
exactly how the September 11 attacks were funded, but the sheer 
possibility that it may have been funded through antiquities smuggling 
from Afghanistan, in my view, a strong argument in favor of imposing 
emergency import restrictions to prevent the import into the United 
States of antiquities that have been illegally removed from Afghan.

                                                     Staffan Lunden

                                 <F-dash>

                                        Westfield, New Jersey 07090
                                                    August 17, 2005
Congressman E. Clay Shaw
Chairman
Subcommittee on Trade of the Committee on Ways and Means
U.S. House of Representatives

Dear Congressman Shaw,

    As a professional archeologist and a concerned American citizen, I 
am writing to urge your support for including H.R. 915 Cultural 
Conservation of the Crossroads of Civilization Act (``A bill to 
authorize the President to take certain actions to protect 
archaeological or ethnological
    materials of Afghanistan'') in the Miscellaneous Tariffs bill. This 
Act grants authority to the President to impose emergency import 
restrictions to prevent the import into the United States of 
antiquities and other cultural materials that have been illegally 
removed from Afghan cultural institutions and other locations, 
particularly archaeological sites in Afghanistan.
    Archaeological sites are now being looted on an alarmingly large 
scale in Afghanistan. The heritage of Afghanistan has played an 
important role in the world's historical and cultural development. The 
looting of sites destroys the historical, cultural, religious and 
scientific information that may be derived through careful and 
systematic investigation of sites. All people interested in prehistory, 
history and the development of modern civilization should be concerned 
about this issue. When the archaeological record is destroyed we are 
all affected.
    The looting of sites and theft from museums in Afghanistan have 
been significant problems for many years. As with Iraq, the United 
States has undertaken a special relationship with Afghanistan. Concern 
for preservation of the cultural heritage of Afghanistan must be given 
equal consideration. Sites are looted of antiquities so that they can 
be sold ultimately to markets in Western Europe and the United States. 
It is crucial that the President be given this authority to prevent the 
import into the United States of looted cultural materials and thereby 
reduce the incentive for theft and destruction of archaeological sites. 
Enactment of this legislation will help the United States to fulfill 
its obligations to the Afghan people and help to enrich global 
understanding of the world's cultural heritage.
            Very truly yours,
                                      Sydne B. Marshall, Ph.D., RPA

                                 <F-dash>

                                      Murfreesboro, Tennessee 37132
                                                    August 30, 2005
Congressman E. Clay Shaw
Chairman
Subcommittee on Trade of the Committee on Ways and Means
U.S. House of Representatives

Dear Congressman Shaw,

    I am a Professional Archaeologist and Assistant Professor of 
Anthropology writing to you to urge your support for including H.R. 915 
Cultural Conservation of the Crossroads of Civilization Act (``A bill 
to authorize the President to take certain actions to protect 
archaeological or ethnological materials of Afghanistan'') in the 
Miscellaneous Tariffs bill. Such legislation is of worldwide, and 
immediate, interest.
    This Act grants authority to the President to impose emergency 
import restrictions to prevent the import into the United States of 
antiquities and other cultural materials that have been illegally 
removed from Afghan cultural institutions and other locations, 
particularly archaeological sites in Afghanistan. The heritage of 
Afghanistan has played an important role in the world's historical and 
cultural development.
    This legislation is necessary due to the large-scale looting of 
archaeological sites taking place in Afghanistan. The looting of sites 
destroys the historical, cultural, religious and scientific information 
that is derived through the careful, systematic excavation of sites. 
When this record is destroyed we are all the poorer for it.
    The looting of sites and theft from museums in Afghanistan have 
been significant problems for many years. As with Iraq, the United 
States has undertaken a special relationship with Afghanistan. Our 
concern for the preservation of the cultural heritage of Afghanistan 
must be given equal consideration.
    Sites are looted of antiquities so that they can be sold ultimately 
to markets in Western Europe and the United States. It is crucial that 
the President be given this authority to prevent the import into the 
United States of looted cultural materials and thereby reduce the 
incentive for theft and destruction of archaeological sites. Enactment 
of this legislation will help the us, the United States of America, to 
fulfill our obligations to the Afghan people and help to enrich our 
understanding of the world's, and our own, cultural heritage.
                                              Tanya M. Peres, Ph.D.
                                                Assistant Professor

                                 <F-dash>

                                               Las Cruces, NM 88012
                                                  September 2, 2005
Congressman E. Clay Shaw, Chairman
Subcommittee on Trade of the Committee on Ways and Means
U.S. House of Representatives

    I am writing to express my concerns about a piece of legislation 
authorizing import restrictions relating to Afghan artifacts (H.R. 915) 
that appears to be ready to be folded into the Miscellaneous Trade 
Bill. Congress should exempt coins from any such restrictions. If that 
is not feasible, Congress should refer the matter to the U.S. Cultural 
Property Advisory Committee for consideration or, at the very least, 
severely limit Customs' authority to seize coins without conclusive 
proof that they were illegally removed from Afghan institutions or 
archaeological sites.
    Coins are not national treasures. Historical coins were struck in 
the millions and circulated widely in antiquity as hard currency. 
Consider the flow of dollars across borders today. Ancient coins 
crossed borders in a similar way. Placing the burden of proof on 
collectors to show ``provenance'' could ``cloud the title'' to hundreds 
of thousands, if not millions, of historical coins already in 
collections here and abroad. Such coins could not travel in 
international commerce without fear of unjustified detention and 
seizure.
    Import restrictions wrongly assume that Customs can reasonably rely 
on generic lists of coins that circulated in Afghanistan to trigger an 
importer's obligation to document country of origin. However, such an 
assumption places an impossible burden on importers of coins. Coins 
typically lack a ``provenance.'' It is quite unusual to know where or 
when a specific coin may have been excavated, or whether it has passed 
through the centuries as a store of value.
    Your assistance in ensuring that Congress take action to ensure 
that the problems described above are dealt with before this 
legislation becomes law will be greatly appreciated.
                                                     Robert O. Pick

                                 <F-dash>

                    [By permission of the Chairman:]

                                                       Oslo, Norway
                                                    August 18, 2005
Congressman E. Clay Shaw
Chairman
Subcommittee on Trade of the Committee on Ways and Means
U.S. House of Representatives

Dear Congressman Shaw,

    I am a Norwegian citizen writing to you to humbly urge your support 
for including H.R. 915 Cultural Conservation of the Crossroads of 
Civilization Act (``A bill to authorize the President to take certain 
actions to protect archaeological or ethnological materials of 
Afghanistan'') in the Miscellaneous Tariffs bill. Such legislation is 
of worldwide interest.
    This Act grants authority to the President to impose emergency 
import restrictions to prevent the import into the United States of 
antiquities and other cultural materials that have been illegally 
removed from Afghan cultural institutions and other locations, 
particularly archaeological sites in Afghanistan.
    This legislation is necessary because archaeological sites are now 
being looted on a large scale in Afghanistan. The heritage of 
Afghanistan has played an important role in the world's historical and 
cultural development. The looting of sites destroys the historical, 
cultural, religious and scientific information that is derived through 
the careful, systematic excavation of sites. When this record is 
destroyed we are all the poorer for it.
    The looting of sites and theft from museums in Afghanistan have 
been significant problems for many years. As with Iraq, the United 
States has undertaken a special relationship with Afghanistan. Concern 
for preservation of the cultural heritage of Afghanistan must be given 
equal consideration.
    Sites are looted of antiquities so that they can be sold ultimately 
to markets in Western Europe and the United States. It is crucial that 
the President be given this authority to prevent the import into the 
United States of looted cultural materials and thereby reduce the 
incentive for theft and destruction of archaeological sites. Enactment 
of this legislation will help the United States to fulfill its 
obligations to the Afghan people and help to enrich our understanding 
of the world's and our own cultural heritage.
            Yours sincerely,
                                          Josephine Munch Rasmussen

                                 <F-dash>

                                    Berrien Springs, Michigan 49104
                                                    August 24, 2005
Congressman E. Clay Shaw
Chairman
Subcommittee on Trade
Committee on Ways and Means
U.S. House of Representatives

Dear Congressman Shaw:

    I am writing to urge your support for including H.R. 915 Cultural 
Conservation of the Crossroads of Civilization Act (``A bill to 
authorize the President to take certain actions to protect 
archaeological or ethnological materials of Afghanistan'') in the 
Miscellaneous Tariffs
    bill. This Act grants authority to the President to impose 
emergency import restrictions to prevent the import into the United 
States of antiquities and other cultural materials that have been 
illegally removed from Afghan cultural institutions and other 
locations, particularly archaeological sites in Afghanistan.
    This legislation is necessary because archaeological sites are now 
being looted on a large scale in Afghanistan. The heritage of 
Afghanistan has played an important role in the world's historical and 
cultural development. The looting of sites destroys the historical, 
cultural, religious and scientific information that is derived through 
the careful, systematic excavation of sites. When this record is 
destroyed we are all the poorer for it.
    The looting of sites and theft from museums in Afghanistan have 
been significant problems for many years. As with Iraq, the United 
States has undertaken a special relationship with Afghanistan. Concern 
for preservation of the cultural heritage of Afghanistan must be given 
equal consideration.
    Sites are looted of antiquities so that they can be sold ultimately 
to markets in Western Europe and the United States. It is crucial that 
the President be given this authority to prevent the import into the 
United States of looted cultural materials and thereby reduce the 
incentive for
    theft and destruction of archaeological sites. Enactment of this 
legislation will help the United States to fulfill its obligations to 
the Afghan people and help to enrich our understanding of the world's 
and our own cultural heritage.

                                                    Paul Ray, Ph.D.
                            Director of Archaeological Publications

                                 <F-dash>

                                                  Seattle, WA 98112
                                                  September 2, 2005
Congressman E. Clay Shaw
Chairman
Subcommittee on Trade of the Committee on Ways and Means
U.S. House of Representatives

Dear Congressman Shaw,

    I am writing to urge your support for including H.R. 915 Cultural 
Conservation of the Crossroads of Civilization Act (``A bill to 
authorize the President to take certain actions to protect 
archaeological or ethnological materials of Afghanistan'') in the 
Miscellaneous Tariffs bill. This Act grants authority to the President 
to impose emergency import restrictions to prevent the import into the 
United States of antiquities and other cultural materials that have 
been illegally removed from Afghan cultural institutions and other 
locations, particularly archaeological sites in Afghanistan. This 
legislation is necessary because archaeological sites are now being 
looted on a large scale in Afghanistan. The heritage of Afghanistan has 
played an important role in the world's historical and cultural 
development. The looting of sites destroys the historical, cultural, 
religious and scientific information that is derived through the 
careful, systematic excavation of sites. When this record is destroyed 
we are all the poorer for it.
    The looting of sites and theft from museums in Afghanistan have 
been significant problems for many years. As with Iraq, the United 
States has undertaken a special relationship with Afghanistan. Concern 
for preservation of the cultural heritage of Afghanistan must be given 
equal consideration.
    Sites are looted of antiquities so that they can be sold ultimately 
to markets in Western Europe and the United States. It is crucial that 
the President be given this authority to prevent the import into the 
United States of looted cultural materials and thereby reduce the 
incentive for theft and destruction of archaeological sites. Enactment 
of this legislation will help the United States to fulfill its 
obligations to the Afghan people and help to enrich our understanding 
of the world's and our own cultural heritage.
                                                      Angela Redman

                                 <F-dash>

                                    Saving Antiquities for Everyone
                                      Jersey City, New Jersey 07310
                                                  September 6, 2005
Congressman E. Clay Shaw
Chairman
Subcommittee on Trade of the Committee on Ways and Means
U.S. House of Representatives
1236 Longworth House Office Building
Washington, D.C. 20515-0922

Dear Congressman Shaw,

    I am writing to urge your support for including H.R. 915 Cultural 
Conservation of the Crossroads of Civilization Act (``A bill to 
authorize the President to take certain actions to protect 
archaeological or ethnological materials of Afghanistan'') in the 
Miscellaneous Tariffs bill. This gives the President the authority to 
impose restrictions to prevent the import into the United States of 
cultural materials that have been illegally removed from Afghanistan.
    It is worth reminding ourselves that, nearly four years after the 
U.S.-led invasion of Afghanistan, 18,000 U.S. troops remain on the 
ground there today. America's responsibilities to the fledgling 
Afghanistan government are obvious. One of those duties is to respect 
Afghan law.
    Under Afghanistan law--the Code for the Protection of Antiquities 
in Afghanistan (1958)--every Afghan antiquity (artistic relic and 
monuments, moveable or immovable, dating prior to 1748) illegally 
excavated and smuggled from that country is considered stolen property. 
The Code for the Protection of Antiquities in Afghanistan has been 
governing law since 1958.
    The best way for the United States to voice its respect for Afghan 
law is to pass H.R. 915, urge the Senate to pass similar legislation, 
and present the final bill to the Presidential for his signature.
    The seriousness of this issue becomes clear after reviewing the 
large number of Afghan antiquities now in the U.S.--in major museums, 
at universities and in private collections--that were illegally 
excavated (looted) and smuggled from Afghanistan. Even though such 
artifacts are considered stolen property by the Afghan government, 
Americans continue to import and acquire these looted artifacts with 
impunity--despite recent court rulings [United States v. Schultz, 333 
F.2d 393 (2d Cir. 2003)] that make artifacts exported in violation of a 
source country's laws and imported to the U.S. subject to the National 
Stolen Property Act (18 U.S.C. Sec. Sec. 2314--15).
    I trust you will support passage of H.R. 915 Cultural Conservation 
of the Crossroads of Civilization Act. I thank you for giving this 
matter your time and consideration.
            Yours sincerely,
                                                           Cindy Ho

                                 <F-dash>

                                   Society for American Archaeology
                                               Washington, DC 20002
                                                    August 19, 2005
The Honorable E. Clay Shaw, Jr.
Chairman, Subcommittee on Trade
House Ways and Means Committee
1104 Longworth House Office Building
Washington, D.C. 20515

Dear Chairman Shaw:

    The Society for American Archaeology respectfully requests that 
H.R. 915, the Cultural Conservation of the Crossroads of Civilization 
Act, be included in the miscellaneous trade legislation package that 
the subcommittee will consider later this year. This legislation would 
serve a vital purpose by enabling the U.S. to assist Afghanistan in its 
struggle against those who engage in the illicit excavation and 
trafficking of its cultural heritage.
    SAA is an international organization that, since its founding in 
1934, has been dedicated to the research, interpretation, and 
protection of the archaeological heritage of the Americas. With more 
than 6,800 members, the Society represents professional archaeologists 
in colleges and universities, museums, government agencies, and the 
private sector. SAA has members in all 50 states as well as many other 
nations around the world.
    H.R. 915 would amend the Cultural Property Implementation Act 
(CPIA) to allow the President to impose emergency import restrictions 
on antiquities and works of art illegally excavated and exported from 
Afghanistan. Current law prevents the President from doing so. Under 
the existing CPIA, nations that are suffering from looting, and that 
are signatories to the 1970 UNESCO Convention on the prevention of 
illicit trafficking in cultural property, can request that the U.S. 
impose import restrictions on categories of cultural property that are 
threatened by looters. These restrictions are designed to stanch the 
importation of illegally-procured objects into the U.S. Unfortunately, 
Afghanistan has not ratified the 1970 UNESCO Convention, and thus 
cannot ask the U.S. for such protection. H.R. 915 would allow the 
President to impose such restrictions, upon the government of 
Afghanistan's request, even though that nation is not a signatory to 
the 1970 Convention. The restrictions would remain in effect until 
September 30, 2010, or five years after the date upon which relations 
between the U.S. and Afghan governments are established, whichever is 
earlier.
    There is no question that Afghanistan is suffering from an epidemic 
of looting of its cultural resources. Two decades of near-constant war 
have seen devastating amounts of damage inflicted on that country's 
ancient and unique cultural heritage. The Afghan people, as well as the 
world's peoples, are losing an immense and irreplaceable heritage. What 
is lost is not only the objects, as important as they are, but also 
knowledge of the past. When archaeological materials are 
unscientifically removed from their resting places, an enormous amount 
of information about the objects, the places they came from, and the 
people who lived there, is lost. Quite often the objects themselves 
disappear forever, sold on the black market or in auction houses under 
fraudulent circumstances. Unfortunately, our nation is a major market 
for such goods. That is why this legislation is so badly needed. The 
import restrictions that H.R. 915 would make possible--while no 
panacea--would make a substantial improvement in our ability to deter 
the illegal excavation and trafficking of Afghan cultural materials.
    The SAA respectfully requests the inclusion of H.R. 915 in the 
upcoming omnibus trade legislation.
            Sincerely,
                                                    Kenneth M. Ames
                                                          President


                                 <F-dash>

                                                   The Field Museum
                                            Chicago, Illinois 60605
                                                  September 2, 2005
The Honorable E. Clay Shaw, Jr.
Chairman
Subcommittee on Trade, Committee on Ways and Means
U.S. House of Representatives
1102 Longworth House Office Building
Washington DC 20515

Dear Chairman Shaw:

    I am submitting this letter to urge your support for the inclusion 
of H.R. 915, Cultural Conservation of the Crossroads of Civilization 
Act (``A bill to authorize the President to take certain actions to 
protect archaeological or ethnological materials of Afghanistan''), in 
the Miscellaneous Tariffs bill. This bill grants the authority to the 
President to impose emergency import restrictions under the Convention 
on Cultural Property Implementation Act (CPIA) to prevent the import 
into the United States of antiquities and other cultural materials that 
have been illegally removed from the cultural institutions and 
archaeological sites of Afghanistan.
    Too often, public perception has held that the value of 
archaeological research is based only on the recovery of beautiful 
objects. Archaeological research, however, relies on detailed and 
extensive analysis of all of a site's contents, from the remains of 
building and house layouts to material goods to faunal and floral 
remains to details of soil composition and chemistry. When a site is 
looted, the disturbance of site context has far-reaching consequences 
for the level and quality of information that can be recovered through 
scientific methods. Looters destroy far more than they know when 
digging indiscriminately.
    I am an archaeologist specializing on the analysis of faunal 
remains, the ubiquitous animal bones that are so commonly a part of 
human living arrangements. The material that I work with is not 
desirable to the collector, but it is invaluable to an archaeologist 
interested in questions ranging across topics that include the origins 
of domestication, economic exchanges between societies, the nature of 
social status, and local environmental and subsistence conditions. 
Faunal material is also easily disturbed and scattered, or tossed 
aside, by looting.
    In the specific case of Afghanistan, the world at large, and 
Afghanistan in particular, is losing its cultural heritage, bit by bit, 
on a daily basis. Afghanistan sits on a crossroads that have made it a 
lively and dynamic location for trade in goods, ideas, beliefs, and 
technology. The ancient Silk Road crossed Afghanistan bringing into 
contact people and cultures from the Far East, the Mediterranean basin, 
and South Asia. Early Buddhist and Persian cities and states 
flourished, and their histories inform us on geopolitical currents in 
the ancient world.
    A country with a rich and varied history is rich indeed, and it is 
my belief that bills such as H.R. 915 do exert a positive influence by 
restricting demand for illegally looted artifacts, and thus also serve 
to discourage supply of these items. Given the special relationship 
that the United States has formed with the country of Afghanistan, 
imposition of import restrictions on illegally excavated antiquities is 
one way in which to help conserve a fascinating and important region's 
cultural history.

                                                     Deborah Bekken
                                                    Adjunct Curator

                                 <F-dash>

                    [By permission of the Chairman:]

                                  The World Archaeological Congress
                                      Adelaide, SA, 5001, Australia
                                                    August 29, 2005
Congressman E. Clay Shaw
Chairman
Subcommittee on Trade of the Committee on Ways and Means
U.S. House of Representatives

Dear Congressman Shaw,

    The World Archaeological Congress (WAC) urges you to support the 
inclusion of H.R. 915 Cultural Conservation of the Crossroads of 
Civilization Act (A bill to authorize the President to take certain 
actions to protect archaeological or ethnological materials of 
Afghanistan) in the Miscellaneous Tariffs bill that is presently before 
the House of Representatives.
    The WAC strongly supports this initiative, which would provide 
legal means to prevent the importation into the United States of 
illegally removed Afghan antiquities and other cultural materials. 
Significant artifacts and works of art are currently being looted from 
archaeological sites in Afghanistan with a view to being sold 
ultimately to markets in Western Europe and the United States. With 
this
    legislation, the incentive to participate in this theft will be 
significantly minimized.
    The World Archaeological Congress is an international organization, 
which represents professional archaeologists in tertiary institutions, 
museums, government agencies, and the private sector from more than 90 
countries. It seeks to promote interest in the past in all countries, 
to encourage the development of regionally based histories and 
international academic interaction, and has a particular interest in:

    <bullet>  education about the past
    <bullet>  archaeology and indigenous peoples
    <bullet>  the ethics of archaeological enquiry
    <bullet>  the protection of sites and objects of the past
    <bullet>  the effect of archaeology on host communities
    <bullet>  the ownership, conservation and exploitation of the 
archaeological heritage
    <bullet>  the application of new technologies in archaeology and in 
archaeological communication
    <bullet>  the place of archaeology in a post-colonial world.

    In the past, the U.S. government has exercised thoughtful 
responsibility for its own national heritage, knowing that it is 
irreplaceable, and has acknowledged the protective value of appropriate 
legislation.
    The WAC believes that this proposed legislation is vital for the 
protection of the heritage of Afghanistan--a heritage that has played 
an important role in the world's historical and cultural development. 
Archaeological treasures have inherent value to cultural identity, not 
only to the Afghan people, but to the world community as well. In the 
last two decades looting in Afghanistan has been devastating to that 
country's cultural heritage. The current looting of archaeological 
sites destroys the historical, cultural, religious and scientific 
information that is derived through the careful, systematic excavation 
of sites. When this record is destroyed we are all the poorer for it.
    The United States has undertaken a special relationship with 
Afghanistan, as they have previously done with Iraq. Concern for 
preservation of the cultural heritage of Afghanistan must be given 
equal consideration. It is crucial that the President be given this 
authority to prevent the import into the United States of looted 
cultural materials.
    With the enactment of this legislation the United States will take 
another crucial step towards fulfilling its obligations to the Afghan 
people and our understanding of the world's and our own cultural 
heritage will be significantly enriched.

                                                    Dr Claire Smith
                                                          President

                                              Dr Larry J. Zimmerman
                                                     Vice President

                                 <F-dash>

                                            Chicago, Illinois 60605
                                                  September 2, 2005
The Honorable E. Clay Shaw, Jr.
Chairman, Subcommittee on Trade, Committee on Ways and Means
U.S. House of Representatives
1102 Longworth House Office Building
Washington, D.C. 20515

Dear Chairman Shaw:

    Like many other people in the world, I am extremely concerned about 
the destruction of Afghanistan's cultural heritage. Since our country 
took on the responsibility of trying to provide a better future for the 
people of Afghanistan, we cannot ignore the issue of protecting 
archaeological and ethnological materials. I urge you to support H.R. 
915, the Cultural Conservation of the Crossroads of Civilization Act. 
Our President needs the authority to impose emergency import 
restrictions of such objects, so that cultural materials (modern, 
historic, and ancient) from sovereign nations like Afghanistan are 
protected. Americans like myself deeply value our own cultural 
heritage, and we understand the similar feelings of the people of 
Afghanistan.
    As a professional archaeologist and anthropologist, I know that the 
destruction of ancient sites and traditionally valued craft goods and 
related objects is devastating to people from the affected communities 
and to the scholarly community as a whole. The illegal removal of 
archaeological and ethnological items is often done in conjunction with 
the destruction of cultural sites that are equally meaningful to 
people. We owe it to the world as a whole to help protect the rich 
cultural heritage of Afghanistan. Our gesture proving to the world that 
we care about Afghanistan's cultural heritage will improve goodwill in 
this region, and beyond.

                                           Anne P. Underhill, Ph.D.
                Associate Curator and Professor, Asian Anthropology

                                 <F-dash>

                                                         Unidroit-L
                                                   Goleta, CA 93117
                                                    August 30, 2005
E. Clay Shaw, Jr., Chairman
Ways and Means Committee
Subcommittee on Trade
United States House of Representatives
1236 Longworth House Office Building
Washington, DC 20515

Dear Congressman Shaw:

    I am writing regarding forthcoming hearings on H.R. 915, 
particularly inclusion of ancient coins in the list of restricted 
items.
    I am founder and listowner of Unidroit-L, a discussion group 
dedicated to study and discussion of cultural property law and the 
impact of such laws on collectors. Next to the 1995 Unidroit 
Convention, the 1970 UNESCO Convention and its implementation have been 
our most active topic. Members of this list include archaeologists, 
curators, educators, legal experts and researchers, as well as 
collectors and dealers.
    Unidroit-L has critically examined effects of cultural property law 
on antiquities collecting, including specific conventions and 
legislation. Early in this study, it became apparent that cultural 
property laws have been drafted without consideration of methods by 
which the antiquities market actually functions, or of practices 
normally followed by collectors and dealers in buying and selling 
antiquities. Certain provisions of these laws would in practice be 
quite unrealistic and unreasonable, for example those requiring 
documentation of provenance for artifacts of small value such as coins, 
for which provenance records have never been kept.
    In our discussions it soon became evident that divergences between 
perception and reality severely hamper development of realistic, 
effective cultural property laws. Misconceptions and stereotypes exist 
on both sides. Archaeologists tend to think of collectors as wealthy 
bankers, seeking rare and important antiquities to adorn their villas, 
without regard for laws violated or damage done when archaeological 
sites are plundered to satisfy their lust for the beautiful and rare. 
Collectors tend to think of archaeologists as arrogant and unrealistic 
academics, demanding total control of all excavations and everything 
ever dug up, without regard for economic practicality or damage to 
innocent, beneficial avocations such as collecting coins.
    When real archaeologists and real collectors meet in circumstances 
allowing rational discussion, they find that such preconceptions are 
wrong. Real collectors are not bankers jealously hoarding ancient 
treasures in their vaults, and real archaeologists tend to be quite 
reasonable people once you get to know them. When preconceptions and 
ideology are set aside, genuine progress toward preserving cultural 
heritage can be made while preserving and encouraging responsible, 
ethical collecting. Such free intellectual interchange does not often 
happen, because ideology rather than practical reality is presently 
driving developments.
    It has become an article of faith among preservationists that the 
antiquities market and antiquities collecting are the source of all 
ills threatening preservation of cultural heritage. If private 
collecting of antiquities could only be eliminated, so preservationists 
believe, there would be no market for stolen, smuggled or illegally 
exported artifacts, and according to this point of view, plundering of 
archaeological and cultural heritage sites would cease.
    This is a naive and unrealistic perspective. Anticollecting 
ideology has isolated preservationists from the antiquities market for 
so many years that they do not understand how it functions. Those in 
the trade know that no government or international organization will 
ever have the power to abolish the antiquities market. It will continue 
in one form or another, whatever laws or conventions may be enacted. 
Declaring the antiquities trade to be illegal would only ensure that 
instead of being openly conducted by responsible dealers bound by codes 
of ethics and laws, it would become a black market activity conducted 
by criminals. In the 1920s a similarly mistaken policy, when sale of 
alcoholic beverages was made illegal by the Volstead Act, did major 
social damage in the United States. It is recognized today that these 
negative consequences far outweighed any good that could possibly have 
been achieved. That unwise repressive law did not even reduce 
consumption of alcohol, which actually increased.
    Nations whose cultural heritage is threatened by looting and 
smuggling of antiquities and other cultural objects do not lack 
repressive laws. Every such state has laws prohibiting clandestine 
excavation or export of such items. The people of these nations do not 
respect these laws, instead viewing them as measures designed to ensure 
that corrupt officials can extort bribes, so proceeds from discoveries 
will go to them rather than the finders. Repressive antiquities 
legislation has failed everywhere it has been enacted, even in 
democratic European states such as Italy. Imposing this ineffective 
approach within the USA cannot accomplish anything positive, but would 
instead bring with it the contempt for law that prevails in antiquities 
source countries.
    One nation has effectively solved the problem of managing the 
desires of its people to discover antiquities and to profit from these 
discoveries. The United Kingdom has set a standard for the world to 
emulate in the Portable Antiquities Scheme. This well thought out 
measure has gained strong cooperation from the British public, who 
between April 2003 and March 2004 reported discovery of more than 
47,000 artifacts. Every year reporting of finds improves, and where 
Finds Liason Officers have been appointed, large increases in finds 
reports result. Local volunteer archaeologists, regional 
archaeologists, and detectorist clubs have joined in training those 
interested in searching for antiquities, defining approved processes of 
responsible discovery and reporting. In addition to ensuring that finds 
will be reported, this cooperation has developed a valuable 
``scouting'' system locating many new excavation opportunities. 
Although the Portable Antiquities Scheme is not yet ten years old and 
is still developing, it has already become far more effective in 
controlling public behavior than repressive laws in any other nation. 
It has conclusively proven that developing cooperation is a much better 
approach than repression.
    Observing how ineffective repression has always been in protecting 
antiquities, even in days when no one collected them and those caught 
disturbing tombs or monuments died instantly and unpleasantly, I have 
come to understand that the only workable way to suppress illicit 
antiquities trafficking is for preservationists, cultural authorities, 
collectors and dealers to cooperate in establishing a regulated trade 
in provenanced antiquities. There are some laws everyone obeys, whether 
or not they realize it, among which are the laws of economics. If a 
regulated trade in provenanced antiquities is established, economic 
effects will devalue unprovenanced antiquities and illicit trade will 
cease, just as abruptly as rumrunning and speakeasies disappeared when 
a regulated legal trade in alcohol was established.
    The technology and systems required to implement such a regulated 
trade presently exist, and are well proven in other applications. The 
only genuine obstacle to a cooperative licit trade is the negative, 
confrontational attitude of preservationists who advocate abolishing 
all collecting of antiquities. Cherishing illusions that legal 
prohibition of collecting is possible and would eliminate the illicit 
antiquities trade, they regard cooperation with collectors or the trade 
as unethical. All discoveries must be retained by institutions and 
cultural authorities, whether or not they have any prospect of ever 
being displayed to the public or being needed for research. Such vast 
numbers of antiquities have been amassed by official hoarding that 
there is no room to store them properly, no staff to inventory them, 
let alone organize them into collections or provide conservation. They 
rot unconserved on warehouse shelves where no one will ever benefit 
from their discovery. There have even been reports that archaeologists 
have broken intact ceramics not wanted by their institutions, to 
prevent them from falling into the hands of collectors.
    The millions of surplus artifacts presently warehoused in 
facilities without proper staff or climate control, sometimes vermin 
infested, also lack proper security. For the most part these facilities 
are not guarded, and are in constant danger of being broken into by 
thieves and vandals. The loss of millions of unpublished artifacts when 
the Beit She'an warehouse was set afire by vandals in March 2004 stands 
out among many reports of such destructive incidents. Only three weeks 
ago, the antiquities warehouse in Sidon was broken into, and thieves 
vandalized the premises before smashing two sarcophagi and stealing the 
head of one with a rare Byzantine inscription.
    Still more unpleasant to relate, the huge numbers of antiquities 
amassed in official hoards have proven an irresistible temptation to 
all too many charged with their care and protection. Recently the 
former director of Egypt's Supreme Council of Antiquities department 
for inspecting private collections received a life sentence for taking 
bribes, forgery and profiteering by supplying smugglers with 
certificates that genuine antiquities were fakes (which can legally be 
exported). Many other reports of official complicity in illegal trading 
and smuggling (even cases of outright insider theft) can be found in 
the archive of Unidroit-L. The dirty secret of museums and cultural 
institutions is that the incidence of custodial theft and other staff 
misconduct is distressingly high. Many cases of this never come to 
light, and others are only detected after many years have passed. It is 
an open secret in the antiquities trade that most of those who staff 
museums and cultural institutions in Third World countries are poorly 
paid, poorly qualified and in far too many cases, inclined to steal 
whatever they think they can get away with.
    Finally, official hoarding of antiquities has simply created an 
artificial scarcity of licit provenanced artifacts, which sustains and 
makes possible the illicit antiquities market. There are plenty of 
antiquities to fill every museum to overflowing, satisfy all needs of 
science, and still release a large surplus of redundant unneeded 
artifacts as provenanced, licit collectibles. The unreasonable, 
uncooperative ideology of preservationists who deny provenanced 
artifacts to collectors and influence others to do so, is the real root 
cause of archaeological site looting and illicit antiquities smuggling. 
The day official hoarding is abandoned and a regulated licit market is 
established will be the day looting of archaeological sites and 
smuggling of artifacts ends.
     By any rational standard, the policy of confiscating finds and 
hoarding antiquities in official and governmental custody has proven to 
be a disastrous failure. Stored antiquities are not properly cared for, 
often being destroyed by rot, corrosion or vermin before anyone even 
examines them. They are not properly secured, becoming targets for 
vandalism and theft. They are temptations which many charged with their 
custody cannot resist, resulting in insider theft and other corrupt 
behavior. The public in nations imposing such policies do not believe 
that any of this maladministration is really for their benefit, so they 
violate these repressive laws without any moral compunctions whenever 
they think they can get away with it.
    When the United States ratified the 1970 UNESCO Convention in 1983, 
hearings were held bringing out the evils and futility of repressive 
laws in antiquities source countries. Ratification was enacted with 
significant reservations. The CPIA became law only after a long, 
difficult struggle in which all sides--museums, collectors, 
archaeologists, dealers, and anthropologists--advanced legitimate but 
conflicting positions. Congress did not attempt to choose sides but 
instead established a consultative process, with clear statutory 
guidelines, to determine when U.S. borders should be closed to cultural 
objects from abroad. Debate was intense because the U.S. has always 
favored free trade in allowing cultural objects to enter the United 
States. U.S. courts have repeatedly determined that the government 
should not deviate from free trade just because a cultural object 
enters this country in violation of another nation's export laws. The 
United States does not have any obligation to enforce export control 
laws of other nations.
    Preservationists have now begun an intiative to reverse the 
principle that U.S. courts will not enforce foreign export control 
laws. Such a reversal would have occurred had the United States 
ratified the 1995 UNIDROIT convention, but unified and vigorous 
opposition from the entire U.S. museum, collector, and dealer community 
convinced the State Department to abandon that initiative. Instead, the 
1970 UNESCO Convention is now being exploited in an attempt to achieve 
that policy reversal as an administrative matter under authority of the 
CPIA, with a goal of administratively changing U.S. law to enforce 
foreign export control laws, clearly exceeding the originally intended 
scope of the CPIA. H.R. 915 is one part of this preservationist 
initiative.
    In considering measures such as H.R. 915, one must realize that 
although preservationists may have good intentions and laudable moral 
values, the measures they propose are not thereby guaranteed to be wise 
or well considered. Without going into the merits of this bill as a 
whole, I will present reasons why inclusion of ancient coins in the 
list of restricted objects would be inappropriate, unwise, and might 
well exceed the authority given to the President by section 304 of the 
Convention on Cultural Property Implementation Act (19 U.S.C. 2603). I 
shall further discuss the difficulties that would confront U.S. Customs 
in attempting to enforce such a restriction, and explain why the only 
conceivable approach for enforcing such a restriction would place an 
impossible and unjust burden on importers of ancient coins.
    The CPIA was intended to deal with highly publicized instances of 
pillage that led to enactment of the 1970 UNESCO Convention--looting of 
tombs and monuments, and destruction and dismantling of archaeological 
sites into movable objects. The Act was designed to provide a 
particular remedy under U.S. import laws to bar entry of important 
cultural properties which were actively being looted abroad. Congress 
clearly did not contemplate any wholesale ban on foreign cultural goods 
coming into the United States.
    The CPIA allows the United States to entertain requests from 
foreign nations to bar import of significant specific cultural objects 
which are currently being pillaged. For such a request to be found 
justified, there must be specific evidence of pillage of the embargoed 
goods. Section 2602(a)(2)(A) states that the United States can apply 
import restrictions ``to archeological or ethnological material . . . 
the pillage of which is creating jeopardy to the cultural patrimony'' 
of the requesting state. The Senate report accompanying the CPIA 
confirmed that the new law would authorize the President ``to apply 
specific import or other controls (upon the request of a State Party) 
to archaeological or ethnological materials specifically identified as 
comprising part of a state's cultural patrimony that is in danger of 
being pillaged.''
    A second essential feature of the CPIA is that the United States 
retains discretion to make its own decision under its laws, without 
accepting a foreign nation's characterization of the articles in 
question. Clearly, the U.S. government is not justified in imposing 
import restrictions on the assertion that import of particular objects 
would violate another nation's export control laws.
    There are no grounds for believing that ancient Afghani coins are 
being pillaged today, or have ever been pillaged, on a scale or in a 
manner that jeopardizes the cultural patrimony of Afghanistan. With 
rare exceptions, coins really are not objects of importance to any 
nation's cultural patrimony. Italy certainly has as great a cultural 
patrimony as any nation. During their long history, the peoples of 
ancient Italy struck coins of unrivalled quality and variety. Italy was 
among the first nations to institute legal measures to protect its 
cultural heritage. On June 26, 2005 the Italian government recognized 
that nearly all ancient coins are of such minor cultural importance 
that Italy will no longer require that they be declared to authorities 
when found, or control their export. The few exceptions to this law are 
coins and medals of great rarity or exceptional individual cultural 
significance.
    There is no evidence that anyone disturbs archaeological or 
cultural sites in Afghanistan with a view toward finding ancient coins. 
Tombs, temples and other monuments are very unrewarding places to 
prospect for ancient coins in most parts of the world, as are cities 
and other built up areas. Coins are sometimes found during excavations 
of such sites, but normally these finds are individual coins 
inadvertently lost or discarded, rather than intentionally concealed 
hoards. With rare exceptions, hoards were concealed in out of the way 
places such as in fields or in the woods. This can be clearly seen in 
the 2002 UK report of treasure finds, where only three per cent of 
finds were discovered in the course of archaeological excavations while 
ninety five per cent were discovered by detectorists.
    Apart from the magnitude of this statistical difference, there is 
an important quality difference between coins found in excavations and 
hoards discovered by detectorists. Individually buried coins are rarely 
found in collectible condition. They may be useful for dating strata 
under favorable conditions where upward migration can be ruled out, but 
after exposure to centuries or millennia of corrosion on all surfaces, 
they are usually worth little or nothing to collectors.
    Coins discovered by detectorists were mostly buried in large 
groups, and are often recovered in intact pots or other containers 
which protected them against corrosion. Even in cases where the 
container has perished, it is common to find coins fused together in a 
lump of corrosion products. When the corrosion products are removed by 
conservators, large numbers of coins from the interior of the lump are 
often found to be in relatively pristine condition, retaining a high 
value to collectors. These are the treasures, sometimes containing tens 
of thousands of individual coins, that motivate detectorists to 
prospect for coins.
    Not only are there no valid grounds for classifying coins as 
significant specific cultural objects whose pillage jeopardizes the 
cultural patrimony of Afghanistan, there is no reasonable way to 
distinguish coins originating in Afghanistan from those originating 
elsewhere. In ancient times there was no Afghanistan, which was not 
unified into a single political entity until 1747. During most of 
antiquity, coins were issued in that part of South Central Asia by 
authorities whose realms extended far beyond the borders of present day 
Afghanistan. Most types of coins struck in what is now Afghanistan 
circulated over large parts of the ancient world, and likewise coins 
from distant lands circulated widely in these territories that later 
became modern Afghanistan.
    I will now briefly summarize the pre-Islamic numismatic history of 
Afghanistan.
    Before Alexander the Great conquered Persia, Afghanistan comprised 
parts of several Persian satrapies (provinces), Bactria and Sogdiana 
being the most important. The Persian Empire issued coinage only in 
Asia Minor, for use by its Greek subjects and for paying Greek 
mercenaries.
    Alexander conquered Afghanistan between 330 and 327 b.c., founding 
Hellenic colonies populated by Greek and Macedonian veterans and their 
followers. During his reign and that of Philip III, some interesting 
coins were struck in Bactria, although these were not Macedonian 
imperial issues. After 305 b.c. Seleukos, the satrap of Babylon, 
extended his rule to the eastern provinces of the Alexandrine Empire, 
establishing mints at Bactra and An Khanoum. His control of much of 
this area was tenuous. In 303 b.c. he ceded Pakistan, the Kabul Valley 
and southeastern Afghanistan to Chandragupta Maurya, the Indian ruler 
who introduced Buddhism into Afghanistan. While these areas were under 
Mauryan domination, Indian punchmarked coins were used. The Eastern 
Hellenic realm comprised Bactria (northern Afghanistan and part of 
Turkmenistan) and Sogdiana (Uzbekistan), whose most important city was 
Samarkand. Greek coins with royal Seleukid types were issued until in 
256 b.c., the Seleukid realm lost its eastern provinces. Parthia (in 
Iran, west of Afghanistan) became an independent kingdom, gradually 
absorbing much of the old Persian Empire, while Bactria and Sogdiana 
became an Indo-Greek kingdom under Diodotos, who issued his own coinage 
modeled on Seleukid types. The Seleukid ruler Antiochos III made a 
last, unsuccessful effort to regain these eastern provinces in 206 b.c.
    Thereafter the Indo-Greeks expanded into Pakistan and India, though 
pressed by Scythians and other nomads from the north. Sogdiana was soon 
lost, but Demetrios I regained the Kabul valley around 180 b.c. and 
then further expanded Indo-Greek power into the northern Indus valley. 
Bilingual issues with Greek obverse inscriptions and Indian (Karoshthi) 
reverse inscriptions were struck for Indo-Greek subjects who spoke 
Indic languages.
    Around 130 b.c. the Yueh-Chih, a Central Asian nomad tribe, began a 
migration that drove their Scythian neighbors into Bactria. The 
Scythians conquered most of that province, Indo-Greeks retaining only 
its eastern part where silver mines supported what remained of their 
power. After the fall of Bactria, Indo-Greek Afghanistan comprised 
Badakshan, Tocharestan and the Kabul Valley. The kingdom shifted 
eastward into the northern Indus valley and Kashmir, where its capital 
became Pushkalavati in Gandhara (present day Pakistan). The Scythian 
invasion continued from Bactria down the western edge of the central 
Afghan massif, then eastward through the southern province of Arachosia 
and beyond to the Indus. There Indo-Scythian rulers battled the Indo-
Greeks for a century, issuing coins with bilingual Greek/Indic legends. 
Scythians who settled in western Afghanistan meanwhile became tributary 
to the Parthian kingdom.
    About 25 b.c. the Yueh-Chih expanded from Sogdiana into Bactria, 
taking over Indo-Greek holdings in northern Afghanistan, after which 
the Indo-Greek and Indo-Scythian kingdoms were cut off from their 
silver supply. As the Yueh-Chih took control of Bactria, Scythians in 
western Afghanistan (now known as Indo-Parthians) threw off Parthian 
dominion and marched eastward into the realm of the Indo-Scythians, 
issuing coinage that initially emulated Indo-Scythian types. By the 
beginning of the Christian era the remnants of the Indo-Greek and Indo-
Scythian kingdoms had fallen to the Indo-Parthians and to the Yueh-
Chih, who later became known as the Kushans. The Indo-Parthians ruled 
the Hellenized parts of North India and Pakistan until the Kushans also 
conquered these areas, after which the Indo-Parthians retreated into 
southern Afghanistan, controlling Sakastan and Turan before becoming 
tributary to Persia in 230 a.d.
    At its height the Kushan Empire comprised northern Afghanistan, 
most of Pakistan and much of northern India. Its coinage began as a 
continuation of Indo-Scythian types, evolving into a distinct Indic 
style with Bactrian legends. Persia eventually proved too strong for 
the Kushans, gradually taking over the western part of their realm as 
the vassal kingdom of Kushanshahr, where hybrid Kushano-Sasanian coin 
types were issued. About 350 a.d. the dynast Kidara seized power in 
Peshawar, from which he was able to repel the Sasanians and take over 
remnants of the Kushan Empire, including parts of Afghanistan. This new 
kingdom soon split into four Kidarite successor regimes, of which the 
one centered in Peshawar endured until 460 a.d.
    When Kidara revolted, the Hepthalites or White Hun subjects of 
Persia seized power in Bactria. The Persians had the worst of the 
struggle and their king Peroz was captured. The Hepthalites then 
conquered most of Afghanistan and the Kidarite dominion, issuing 
coinage emulating Sasanian prototypes. About 560 a.d. the Sasanians 
under Khusru I had their revenge. In alliance with the Turks, they 
reconquered most of Afghanistan but could not hold these gains, Bactria 
and eastern Afghanistan being absorbed by the Turkish khanate. After 
the khanate split into independent kingdoms around 600 a.d., the 
Persians made a temporary recovery, but the Sasanian regime 
disintegrated after a disastrous war with the Byzantine Empire, falling 
to the rising power of Islam in 651 a.d. By 700 a.d. most of 
Afghanistan had been absorbed into the Caliphate, although the Kabul 
Valley and southeastern Afghanistan still remained under Turko-
Hepthalite control.
    After Alexander's conquest, pre-Islamic Afghanistan was always 
divided between contending regimes, whose borders in most cases 
extended well beyond the present boundaries of Afghanistan. Our 
knowledge of the mints of these authorities is still very incomplete. 
Coins from all parts of these realms circulated within Afghanistan, 
among coins from other areas. An indicator of this diversity is the 
Qunduz hoard, catalogued by Curiel and Fussman in 1965. It includes an 
Alexandrine imperial coin, Seleukid types issued long after Indo-Greek 
independence, and large numbers of Indo-Greek coins struck in areas 
that later became part of Pakistan.
    Pre-Islamic coin types known to have circulated within Afghanistan, 
which might (however improbably in the case of any individual coin) 
have been discovered in Afghanistan, include issues of the Alexandrine 
Macedonian Empire, the Seleukid Kingdom, various Indo-Greek kingdoms, 
Indo-Scythian and Indo-Parthian kingdoms, Sogdiana and various Central 
Asian polities, the Parthian Kingdom, Sasanian Persia, Kushanshahr, 
Indian rulers and China.
    There is nothing about any individual coin in a typical shipment 
defining its origin, which is legally defined as the place of its 
discovery. That cannot be determined by examination. Many ancient coins 
have been in collections for long periods. The original place of 
discovery is very rarely recorded, usually only when a coin was part of 
a numismatically significant hoard.
    Moreover, a coin may not have been discovered at all. There are 
undoubtedly a great many ancient coins that have never been buried, 
always having been held in treasures before ultimately finding their 
way into collections. Monetary use of ancient coins did not cease in 
ancient times. After World War I, for example, Turkey paid some of its 
reparations with Byzantine gold solidi that had been held for many 
centuries in the Ottoman imperial treasury. Roman coins circulated in 
some parts of Europe into the eighteenth century. No one can say what 
ancient coins have passed from merchant to merchant over the centuries 
in the souks and bazaars of Central Asia and India.
    The only conceivable way to ensure that no coins originating in 
Afghanistan are allowed to enter the U.S. would be to require the 
importer to prove the provenance of each imported example of a very 
wide range of ancient coin types. Because such provenance information 
has never been recorded for nearly all ancient coins, in practice very 
few shipments could be allowed. Placing such an extreme burden of proof 
on an importer transcends all reason. Preservationists who seek to 
outlaw collecting might view the chaos and inequities that would ensue 
as a desirable result, but it would go far beyond anything Congress 
intended to authorize in passing the CPIA.
    I urge the Committee to take a conservative approach in considering 
inclusion of coins in the restrictions authorized by H. R. 915. There 
is no evidence that inclusion of coins can accomplish anything good. 
There is considerable reason to think that arguments for including 
objects such as coins are based on false premises, following a 
repressive policy that has uniformly failed wherever it has been 
applied. There are strong grounds for concluding that inclusion of 
coins would exceed the authority given to the President by the CPIA. 
Finally, there is no reasonable way to include coins in these 
restrictions without imposing an impossible requirement to prove 
provenance, excluding very large numbers of coins which (if their 
provenance could somehow accurately be determined) actually originated 
outside the present day borders of Afghanistan.
                                                     David E. Welsh

                                 <F-dash>

                        University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill
                                              Chapel Hill, NC 27599
                                                     24 August 2005
Congressman E. Clay Shaw
Chairman
Subcommittee on Trade of the Committee on Ways and Means
U.S. House of Representatives

Dear Congressman Shaw,

    I am writing to urge your support for including H.R. 915 Cultural 
Conservation of the Crossroads of Civilization Act (``A bill to 
authorize the President to take certain actions to protect 
archaeological or ethnological materials of Afghanistan'') in the 
Miscellaneous Tariffs bill. This Act grants authority to the President 
to impose emergency import restrictions to prevent the import into the 
United States of antiquities and other cultural materials that have 
been illegally removed from Afghan cultural institutions and other 
locations, particularly archaeological sites in Afghanistan. This 
legislation is necessary because archaeological sites are now being 
looted on a large scale in Afghanistan. The heritage of Afghanistan has 
played an important role in the world's historical and cultural 
development. The looting of sites destroys the historical, cultural, 
religious and scientific information that is derived through the 
careful, systematic excavation of sites. When this record is destroyed 
we are all the poorer for it.
    The looting of sites and theft from museums in Afghanistan have 
been significant problems for many years. As with Iraq, the United 
States has undertaken a special relationship with Afghanistan. Concern 
for preservation of the cultural heritage of Afghanistan must be given 
equal consideration.
    Sites are looted of antiquities so that they can be sold ultimately 
to markets in Western Europe and the United States. It is crucial that 
the President be given this authority to prevent the import into the 
United States of looted cultural materials and thereby reduce the 
incentive for theft and destruction of archaeological sites. Enactment 
of this legislation will help the United States to fulfill its 
obligations to the Afghan people and help to enrich our understanding 
of the world's and our own cultural heritage.
    As Professor of Religious Studies at a large state university 
(University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill), I teach students about 
the importance of the world's cultural heritage, which belongs to all 
of us. Here is a case where the U.S. can help preserve this heritage. I 
hope you will support this legislation.
            Sincerely,
                                                Jodi Magness, Ph.D.
    Kenan Distinguished Professor for Teaching Excellence in Early 
                                                            Judaism
                                    Department of Religious Studies

                                 <F-dash>

 Statement of American Iron & Steel Institute, Cold Finished Steel Bar 
  Institute, Committee on Pipe & Tube Imports, Metals Service Center 
      Institute, Specialty Steel Industry of North America, Steel 
Manufacturers Association, United Steelworkers, and Wire Rod Producers' 
                               Coalition
    The above listed trade groups and union (hereinafter referred to as 
the industry), on behalf of their members in the United States, 
submitted comments to the Department of Commerce on or about May 10, 
2005 on the interim final rule for the Steel Import Monitoring and 
Analysis system (SIMA) issued by the Department on March 11, 2005 as 
70FR 12,133 (See attached). These organizations represent companies 
engaged in the overwhelming majority of steel production and 
distribution in the U.S., as well as the trade union representing the 
majority of production workers.
    In our comments to Commerce, the industry discussed various 
deficiencies and limitations of the SIMA interim final rule, and made 
recommendations which we asked Commerce to consider. The final rule has 
not been released by Commerce.
    While the Commerce interim final rule has significant strengths, 
H.R. 1068 effectively addresses the deficiencies and limitations of 
that rule.
    The steel industry strongly supports the passage of H.R. 1068. We 
also appreciate the opportunity to comment on this important bill, and 
your consideration of the broad need for a comprehensive and permanent 
steel import licensing and monitoring program.

                                 <F-dash>

                                American Wire Producers Association
                                         Alexandria, Virginia 22314
                                                  September 2, 2005
The Honorable Clay Shaw
Chairman
Subcommittee on Trade
Committee on ways and Means
U.S. House of Representatives
1236 Longworth House Office Building
U.S. House of Representatives
Washington, DC 20515

Dear Mr. Chairman,

    On behalf of the member companies of the American Wire Producers 
Association (AWPA), we want to express our support for the inclusion of 
HR 1068 in the miscellaneous trade bill. The AWPA is a national trade 
association representing over 85% of the producers of carbon, alloy, 
and stainless steel wire in the United States. Member companies employ 
more than 76,000 workers at over 255 plants in 34 states, and they have 
combined annual sales in excess of $18 billion.
    We offer the following reasons w