WASHINGTON — Apparel importers were gearing up to make the case against a mandate to screen all U.S.-bound cargo containers at foreign ports as the House passed a national security bill Tuesday night.
The screening measure, incorporated in broad national security legislation, creates new challenges and uncertainty for apparel importers who brought $89.2 billion worth of clothing and textiles to the U.S. last year.
With Democrats controlling Congress for the first time in 12 years, the legislation was approved 299-128 in the House, but faces a tougher time in the Senate, where Democrats hold a two-vote majority, compared with the 32-vote edge in the House.
Many retailers were facing a double whammy as the House prepared to vote on a bill today to raise the minimum wage to $7.25 from $5.15, the first boost in 10 years. More than half the states already have higher minimum wages than the federally mandated rate.
The National Retail Federation, in a letter to House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D., Calif.) on Tuesday, said the minimum wage legislation could hurt smaller companies because it does not provide “targeted assistance for thousands of small businesses employing entry-level workers” to offset the boost. Opponents also argue that legislation would reduce job opportunities for low-skilled, inexperienced workers.
“We’re not saying we oppose a wage hike,” said Steve Pfister, senior vice president of government relations at the NRF. “We feel Congress needs to have a more balanced approach and there needs to be equity, particularly for small businesses. Any way you slice and dice it, this represents a 41 percent increase in the minimum wage.”
Pelosi, who took office last week, has made passage of the security and minimum wage bills a top priority as part of her first “100 hours” agenda.
The security measure would also implement findings of the 9/11 Commission, an independent bipartisan panel that made 41 recommendations on initiatives to strengthen national security and prevent another terrorist attack.
The legislation before Congress also would require screening of all air cargo, provide money to improve communication devices and networks used by emergency agencies and distribute more federal aid to states based on risk instead of population.
Related Articles
You May Also Like
“This bill … requires [that] all cargo containers carried on ships be scanned and sealed before leaving for American ports,” said Rep. Bennie Thompson (D., Miss.), chairman of the Homeland Security Committee. “This bill puts in place the [100 percent] scanning requirement in a reasonable time frame: three years for larger ports and five years for smaller ports.”
Majority Leader Steny Hoyer (D., Md.) said, “How can we have security in America if literally thousands of tons of cargo are shipped in by air or ships and we don’t know their contents?”
The legislation would mandate a phased-in application of technology to monitor for radiation, nuclear materials and weapons at large foreign ports within three years and smaller foreign ports within five years.
However, the clock on the three- and five-year phase-ins would not start until technology at three foreign ports — a requirement a pilot project testing incorporated in a port and cargo security bill Congress passed last year — is completed. It also would require containers to be sealed “as the technology becomes available,” after they have been screened with a device that would sound an alarm if it were tampered with and notify U.S. officials.
Republicans, angered by the Democrats’ procedural strategy of bypassing committee hearings on the bills on the “100 hours” agenda and not allowing amendments, argued against the scanning proposal, saying technology is not available to meet the standard, which they argued would slow global commerce and raise consumer prices.
“To set forth a 100 percent standard when there is no evidence that [the development of technology] can be achieved during that time period is, to me, giving a false hope to the American people,” said Rep. Pete King (R., N.Y.), the ranking Republican on the Homeland Security Committee.
Rep. Don Young (R., Alaska) warned, “Every product, everything you pick up is imported to the United States and this will add costs and it may make us noncompetitive.”
Apparel importers are worried about the implications and potential delays associated with a mandate and they will turn their lobbying efforts to the Senate, where they hope to block it.
“We think it will create a lot of confusion; it will create a lot of uncertainty and it will create costs,” said Stephen Lamar, executive vice president of the American Apparel & Footwear Association. He added, “We believe the Senate will have a much more methodical approach.”