As members of the committee know, from information compiled by the Department of Agriculture, imports of beef have a definite relationship to the price of cattle in the United States. American cattlemen are the last free and completely independent segment of our American economy. They do not want Government controls, nor do they want price supports. And yet, if current trends of imports of beef into the United States are continued in future years, it is almost a certainty that Government programs will be initiated to regulate the production of meat in the United States, and provide another costly price support and subsidy program.

I feel strongly that the American cattlemen are entitled to protection from foreign imports by our Government. Not only are they entitled to this, but they need such protection now if they are to succeed in the years ahead. We know that the American livestock producers are capable of producing the meat that is needed and that will be needed for consumption in the United States in the years ahead. But, if they are continually made to compete with vast foreign imports of meats, they cannot be expected to be able to continue to produce. Where they now have the capacity to expand as consumption expands, to meet the test of supply and demand, they will not be able to do so if they are gradually priced out of business by foreign imports.

Mr. Chairman, imagine if you will, the possibilities of the longrange effect these stepped-up imports of beef might have on the United States. As American cattlemen have to fight the price wars of cheaper produced foreign meat imports, more and more will go out of business. As more and more go out of business, and as U.S. production of meat decreases, foreign imports will increase at least they will have to increase to meet the need. And, as more and more imports come in, more and more American producers will be priced out of the market.

But, then what is to happen? Can we sit here today and say that foreign countries currently importing meat into the United States will be able to supply the total market we now have, at reasonable prices? Will the foreign countries be able, for instance, to supply beef to the United States at a rate of more than 23 billion pounds this year, and 25 billion pounds by 1972, and 30 to 35 billion pounds by 1980? Can we honestly believe that these foreign countries alone can supply such meat to the United States, while at the same time their own consumptions and demands are increasing? And, if so, at what price will this meat, certain to be in much more demand by 1980, be selling for in the United States?

Mr. Chairman, I pose these questions which now hardly seem relevant, because they are very real questions we should consider before we continue to give licensure to foreign imports of meat that threaten this very important industry in the United States. It is time that we give first consideration to American industry and to the American taxpayers rather than consideration of our image in the eyes of foreign countries, particularly when this well-meaning intention of ours may well have a boomerang effect on our country by result of our inability to provide our own food after having been the most productive nation in the world in meat.

I well realize that we now have enacted into law, limitation on meat imports into the United States. It is this very law with which we are

now concerned and with which the legislation I have introduced and support is concerned. The legislation is necessary because of the context of the present legislation, and the high imports it now allows that threaten our American cattle industry as I have discussed.

By virtue of the exclusion of certain types of meat, certain classifications, and by the formulas we have devised for setting new and higher annual import allowances, the current legislation does not in fact have the concern of the American livestock producer at heart.

With this in mind, Mr. Chairman, I would like to present statistics showing the huge increases of meat imports, particularly beef and veal, in recent months and years, making comparisons, and reflecting consumption changes and comparisons.

I have provided tables here based on information of the Department of Agriculture, to provide easy reference to increase and figures discussed. In examining the vast increases in imports, I will cover six areas: (1) meat imports presently subject to quota restrictions: (2) comparisons of 1970 quota meat imports for the first 4 months of this year; (3) imports of prepared and preserved and other meats not presently subject to meat quota restrictions; (4) total import figures, 1965 through 1969, including quota, nonquota and Canadian imports; (5) U.S. beef consumption and percentages of foreign imports; and (6) imports from Canada as they relate to increasing activities by importing countries to bypass U.S. quota agreements and restrictions. Mr. Chairman, it is plain to see from table I how much imports of meats subject to quota restrictions have increased over the years. But, what the chart does not show, is that 1969 imports of meat subject to import quota restrictions came close to triggering quotas.

(The table referred to follows:)

TABLE I-TOTAL IMPORTS, QUOTA RESTRICTION MEATS, 1959-63 AVERAGE TO 1969 (INCLUDING ANNUAL INCREASES, TOTAL INCREASES, AND PERCENTAGE INCREASES)

Note: Average annual increase since 1959-63 average, 8.06%; Average annual increase since 1965, 15.73%; Average annual increase since 1966, 9.61%

Mr. MARTIN. The base quota for 1969 was 988 million pounds product weight, and the 110 percent adjusted base for triggering quotas was 1,086.8 million pounds. The Department of Agriculture, from its first through its fourth and final quarterly estimate in 1969, had estimated total imports for the year at 1,035 million pounds. This estimate was 51.8 million pounds below the amount-maximum-that would have triggered quotas.

However, the total of meats subject to quotas restrictions actually imported for the year, by year's end had reached 1,084.1 million pounds just 2.7 million pounds below the quota trigger maximum

of 1,086.8 million pounds allowed for the year, and nearly 50 million. pounds more than the USDA estimates for the year.

Mr. Chairman, from table II, which compares quota meat imports for the first 4 months of 1970 with the first 4 months of 1969, it is obvious that imports of meats into the United States in 1970 could reach as much as 20 percent more than in 1969, and than is presently allowed under import meat quota restrictions. The situation would, of course, require the imposition of quotas by the Secretary of Agriculture and the Federal Government, on importing nations.

(The table referred to follows:)

TABLE II.-U.S. IMPORTS OF MEAT SUBJECT TO MEAT IMPORT LAW,1 JANUARY-APRIL 1969-70
WITH COMPARISONS

1 Fresh, frozen and chilled beef, veal, mutton and goat meat. Excludes canned beef and other prepared or preserved beef products.

Mr. MARTIN. The Agriculture Department has reported quota restricted meat imports of 425.9 million pounds product weight for the first 4 months of 1970, which includes the two normally low import months of January and February. The adjusted base quota for the year the amount which would trigger quotas-is 1.099 billion pounds, and the Department of Agriculture estimates for the year are 1.062 billion pounds. It is also to be noted that during the first 4 months of 1969, we were experiencing dock strikes on the Atlantic and gulf coasts, which no doubt kept imports down at that time. Otherwise, we should probably have had to trigger quotas by year's end.

Mr. Chairman, what table II shows, is that with 425.9 million pounds of quota meat imports for the first 4 months-the first onethird of 1970, we have already reached 39.3 percent of the total 1969 imports, 38.8 percent of the 1970 adjusted quota that would trigger restrictions, and 40.1 percent of the Department of Agriculture estimate for the year.

At this rate, if the final two-thirds of the year were to have about the same amount of imports-assuming no imposition of quotastotal imports in 1970 would reach 1,277.7 million pounds of import quotas meats. That would be 193.6 million pounds, or 17.9 percent above the actual total 1969 imports; 178.7 million pounds, or 16.3 percent above the 1970 adjusted quota; and 215.7 million pounds, or 20.3 percent above the 1970 estimates.

Turning our attention now to imports of prepared and preserved meats, and canned and others from Canada, which are outside the quota restrictions, from table III we can see that these nonquota imports have risen nearly 60 percent in the last 5 years from 115.5 million pounds in 1965, to 184.3 million pounds product weight in 1969. That is an average annual increase of 13.3 percent.

(The table referred to follows:)

TABLE III.-NONQUOTA MEAT IMPORTS (BEEF AND VEAL, CANNED, PREPARED, PRESERVED, AND FROM CANADA) [In 1,000 pounds product weight]

Mr. MARTIN. I would just comment here that the slight decrease of 3.3 million pounds in 1969 from 1968, is probably accounted for in most part by those same dock strikes during the first half of last year.

These imports will, without a doubt, be substantially larger this year. Already for the first 4 months of this year, they totaled 61,478,000 pounds compared to 49,235,000 for the first 4 months of 1969.

Mr. Chairman, in the table III figures, we are looking at meat imports that are virtually unrestricted-dependent solely on demand and consumption, and without any form of restriction for import by the United States.

Table number IV combines quota restriction meats and nonquota meats, to give the totals of meat imports into the United States for the years 1965 through 1969. With regard to quota meats, it is significant to note that except for the rather large increase in imports from 1965 to 1966, mutton and goat meat imports have remained about the same in recent years, at least without any large increases. However, with beef and veal, this is not the case, and increases have ranged from less than 10 percent to more than 30 percent, annually. Comparing all imports during this period, quota and nonquota-which is primarily all beef and veal-increases have ranged from less than 10 percent to more than 25 percent. From 1965 to 1969, total beef and veal imports have increased by 73.6 percent, with an average annual increase of 15 percent.

(The table referred to follows:)

TABLE IV.-TOTAL MEAT IMPORTS-QUOTA (ALL TYPES), NONQUOTA (INCLUDING FRESH, FROZEN AND CHILLED FROM CANADA, AND ALL OTHER BEEF AND VEAL, CANNED, PREPARED, PRESERVED), 1965 TO 1969

Note: Average annual increase of beef and veal imports equals 15 percent.

Mr. MARTIN. Again, we know that these imports, quota, nonquota, and total, are going to continue to increase under the existing situations. Mr. Chairman, in all of the previous discussion and use of table concerning U.S. meat imports, we have been dealing with the subject of imports specifically as they are compared from one year to the next, and in terms of import increases. This has suited our purpose in viewing the changes in imports into the United States, without any direct relation to the total meat situation within the United States.

I believe, however, that comparisons and analysis should not stop with single import figures. If we are to have a true perspective of the relation of imports to domestic meat figures, consumption and related criteria, we need to make still a further comparison. This I have done in table V.

For this comparison, to get this true perspective of the effect of meat imports on the entire U.S. meat situation, I have compared imports with U.S. beef consumption, and shown how much of the beef consumption in the United States these imports represent.

Again, I have used U.S. Department of Agriculture figures. For 1965 and 1969 comparisons, the Agriculture Department uses population figures for the civilian population of the 50 States. And, since total and average consumption figures are maintained by carcass weight, the imports for these years are also presented in carcass weight figures. Furthermore, by using carcass weight figures, the Agriculture Department is able to separate total mutton and goal meat imports from beef and veal, with which we are concerned in terms of beef consumption in the United States.

(Table V follows:)

TABLE V.-U.S. BEEF CONSUMPTION: 1965-69, AND PERCENT OF FOREIGN IMPORTS
IMPORTS: MILLION POUNDS CARCASS WEIGHT