Ask the Scholar
Document scope · 1 page
Scholar
Ask about this object, its catalog metadata, its source description, or the page inventory.
For page-specific OCR and visual context, open one of the page chats.
Scholar Source Context
Document identity
localId
118569214
label
United States Trade Representative (USTR)
core
doc
dtoType
document
citationUrl
pageCount
1
Source metadata
id
118569214
contentType
document
title
United States Trade Representative (USTR)
citationUrl
identifierLocal
94
collections
Records of the Office of the Chief of Staff (Reagan Administration)
James Cicconi's Agency Files
thumbnailUrl
largeImageUrl
imageCount
1
hasImages
yes
source
import
hasTranscription
no
Source extras
naId
118569214
coverageEndDate
logicalDate
1985-12-31
year
1985
coverageStartDate
logicalDate
1981-01-01
year
1981
levelOfDescription
fileUnit
recordType
description
ocrSource
nara-archive
Single page context
seq
1
pageIndex
0
type
document
mediaId
0511013a35566522
ocrText
USTRemot
3/10
JC
f
JAB not seen
THE UNITED STATES TRADE REPRESENTATIVE
WASHINGTON
20506
March 10, 1982
3/13 "Ic
Please call
MEMO TO:
Broch + tell him
FROM:
James William Baker E. Brock G
guy mow in four as issue.
appoids Togar an this
Jim, just briefly, I want to concur with Rich Williamson's note to you regarding
the Balanced Budget Constitutional Amendment.
Thank him,
ite
As I said in our earlier conversation, I regret the present timing dilemma we
face on this issue. If we were going to avoid having it tied to some revenue
measure, it would be far better to bring it out in mid to late September.
However, the matter may be beyond our control in that regard.
JABE
I am convinced that a significant effort will be made to attach it to the debt PS. Tell
ceiling bill no later than May. Other efforts will be designed to ride on the first
him to help
reconciliation process. In either event, we may have a forcing action which,
unless seized early, could deprive us of the leadership role I think we need.
his ideas
I'm still not convinced as to the best way to proceed, but I did want to pass
coming our
along my sense that serious effort should be made to arrive at a decision on the
question before the matter becomes moot.
very.
Done. he
appreciative.
5/17
P.S. I'm sure you've heard by now that Liddy Dole was absolutely spectacular
at Saints and Sinners Roast today. You might want to give her a pat on
the back, it's well deserved.
USTR memor
THE DEPUTY
UNITED STATES
TRADE REPRESENTATIVE
WASHINGTON
File
June 15, 1981
Fordwear
TO: HONORABLE JAMES A. BAKER III
CHIEF OF STAFF
THE WHITE HOUSE
FROM: David R. Macdonald
I realize that there is little time
to amend the briefing paper for the
President on non-rubber footwear.
Nevertheless, I thought the attached
might be valuable for your considera-
tion.
Attachment
To Frank- has real
no
6/17 MOT
THE UNITED STATES TRADE REPRESENTATIVE
WASHINGTON
20506
BACKGROUND PAPER FOR THE
PRESIDENT'S MEETING ON NON-RUBBER FOOTWEAR RELIEF
This is to provide background for your meeting with the ten
Senators coming in to attempt to influence your decision in favor
of a continuation of import quotas on footwear.
The ITC (Tariff Commission) in 1977 found that imports from
Taiwan and Korea were injuring U.S. non-rubber footwear
industry. President Carter caused USTR to negotiate Orderly
Marketing Agreements (quotas) with these two countries. These 4-
year agreements expire at the end of this month.
In response to the industry request to extend relief for
three more years, the ITC has recommended that the OMA for Taiwan
be continued for two years (other than athletic footwear), but
that the OMA for Korea not be renewed.
Procedurally, this ITC recommendation goes to you --
mechanically, it is staffed out through the Trade Policy Commit-
tee system, which supplies you with an options paper and recom-
mendations.
We would point out the following:
1.
The Senators are not entitled to any particular reaction
by you concerning your preferences, because you have not
received the recommendations of the Trade Policy Commit-
tee.
2.
If the quotas were extended, the statute says that the
extension cannot exceed three years nor be more restric-
tive than that now in place.
3.
Because this is an extension of relief, there is no
Congressional override.
4.
Perhaps some questions by you to the Senators would show
both that you care and are familiar with the problems
involved.
- 2 -
Possible Questions To The Senators:
A.
How do you think the industry's profitability ought to
impact upon any decision in this case? (FYI. The ITC
found that before-tax profits for the U.S. industry as a
whole, which parallels the non-rubber segment, rose 96%
from 1977 to 1980 ($123 million to $242 million). Also,
the ratio of pre-tax profit to stockholders' equity rose
from 19.3 to 28.3 percent).
B.
Do you think that the industry has been sufficiently
aggressive in its capital and research expenditures
during the four-year restraint period to enable itself
to meet foreign competition? (FYI. The ITC found cap-
ital expenditures increased by 8.3 percent in real terms
during the period 1977 to 1980, while R&D expenditures
increased by only 2.2 percent).
C.
What is your opinion of the following assertions which I
understand to be correct:
(a) Taiwan has upgraded its footwear to become competi-
tive with high class U.S. producers?
(b) Other exporting countries not under restraint
agreements have taken the place of Taiwan and
Korea?
Possible General Comments
I am glad to have heard your views, and I can assure you that
they will be taken into account when I consider the recommend-
ations of the Trade Policy Committee. I cannot help but comment
that the enactment of the bipartisan economic program should give
a boost to the U.S. footwear industry, and I hope you will sup-
port that program in order that we won't see as many of these
difficult import problems in the future.
David R. Macdonald
June 15, 1981