27 April 2001
US Department of State
International Information Programs
Washington File
_________________________________
26 April 2001
(A few prominent opponents seek to delay consideration) (680) By Bruce Odessey Washington File Staff Writer Washington -- The Senate has begun grappling with a bill that would reform the Cold War-era law authorizing advanced technology export controls. Although the bill appears to have broad support in Congress as well as endorsement from the Bush administration, a group of conservative Republican committee chairmen opposed are attempting to slow down its consideration with delaying tactics. Because of the opposition, supporters of the bill might twice have to get votes from at least 60 of the 100 senators -- first, to allow the Senate to proceed to debate on the bill and, second, to limit debate. One of the opponents, Intelligence Committee Chairman Richard Shelby, said on the Senate floor April 26 that the bill would remove meaningful export controls on much advanced technology to rivals such as China. "I fear the Senate is signaling to the Chinese that, whatever they do and however much we criticize their actions, we will always put commercial interest ahead of our national security," Shelby said. Shelby and other opponents argue that the Defense Department and other national security agencies need a stronger role in reviewing export-control decisions made by the Commerce Department. At issue is the Export Administration Act (EAA), which regulates exports of computers, machine tools and other dual-use technology -- goods that have both military and civilian applications. Attempts to reform the EAA failed 12 times in the 1990s over disagreements between exporters on one side and national security interests on the other. The EAA lapsed in August 1994, and export controls were maintained under emergency law until late in 2000 when Congress finally passed a bill that extended EAA retroactively and through August 20, 2001. The Senate Banking Committee approved the EAA reform bill in March on a 19-1 vote with only Shelby dissenting. Senator Phil Gramm, Republican chairman on the Banking Committee, said the bill intends to eliminate controls on items no longer controllable and to strengthen controls for the remaining crucial items. It would effectively eliminate U.S. export controls on technology available from foreign sources or available in mass-market quantities. "Rather than waste our time and energy on products that are sold by the millions," Gramm said, "we try to focus our attention in this bill on trying to deal with those technologies that we have some realistic hope of being successful." The bill would allow the administration to anticipate changes in controls because of rapid changes in availability or in technology. It would require the administration to develop a guidance system for exporters by assigning countries to different tiers representing different levels of threat to U.S. national security. It would sharply increase penalties for export-control violations although, at Bush administration request, the committee halved the proposed top penalties -- to $5 million per criminal violation and $500,000 per civil violation. The bill would require timely resolution of inter-agency disputes over decontrolling any item, but also elevate the Defense Department's and other security agencies' participation in the process. It would instruct the president to press other countries to improve their own export-control systems and to cooperate to strengthen multilateral export-control regimes. It would repeal existing law basing control of computer exports on the number of million theoretical operations per second (MTOPs) a computer could execute. Gramm described that measure as obsolete given the increased capability for linking computers together. The bill would authorize the dual-use export-control system through September 2004 unless the president reports to Congress on its implementation and submits recommendations about improving it -- in that case authority would continue indefinitely. "We want a balance that allows us to provide for the national security of the United States," Gramm said, "but on the other hand we want to be able to be the dominant high-tech manufacturer in the world." (The Washington File is a product of the Office of International Information Programs, U.S. Department of State. Web site: http://usinfo.state.gov)