Trade Cases

Trade Groups Split on Bill Limiting Presidential Power Over Section 232

Written by Sandy Williams


Two manufacturing associations came out with opposing views on Wednesday to a new bill that would limit presidential power for the execution of trade measures under Section 232.

The Bicameral Trade Authority Act of 2019, introduced in the House and Senate, would require congressional approval before the president could take trade actions, like tariffs and quotas, under Section 232 of the Trade Expansion Act.

The Alliance for American Manufacturing said in a statement, “This misguided bill should never become law.” 

Conversely, the Coalition of American Metal Manufacturers and Users supported the bill, stating “it would help ensure that tariffs are only imposed under Section 232 for truly national security purposes” and prevent “steel and aluminum tariffs that continue to cause damage to millions of workers in the U.S. manufacturing sector.”

If the bill can gain bipartisan support in the House and Senate, it could potentially revoke the Section 232 steel and aluminum tariffs that were imposed last year by President Trump.

The statements from each association are below:

Alliance for American Manufacturing

A new bill expected in the U.S. House of Representatives today and an accompanying bill expected soon in the U.S. Senate aim to significantly undermine the executive branch’s authority to adjust imports on national security grounds under Section 232 of our trade laws.

Said Alliance for American Manufacturing (AAM) President Scott Paul: “Weakening the ability to push back against market-distorting, anti-competitive practices will only embolden the nations whose trade cheating puts our national security at risk. And it will cost American jobs. Instead of pulling the rug from under the current and future executive, I’d like to see Congress initiate its own trade actions to stand up for American workers. Instead, too many lawmakers have sat on the sidelines as jobs have been shipped overseas. This misguided bill should never become law.”

BACKGROUND: U.S. Sens. Pat Toomey (R-Pa.) and Mark Warner (D-Va.) are expected to introduce the bill’s Senate version, while U.S. Reps. Ron Kind (D-Wis.) and Mike Gallagher (R-Wis.) plan to introduce the House version. The bill is similar to legislation introduced in the 115th Congress by Rep. Gallagher and former Sen. Bob Corker (R-Tenn.)

Coalition of American Metal Manufacturers

Paul Nathanson, spokesperson for the Coalition of American Metal Manufacturers and Users (CAMMU), issued the following statement in support of the introduction of the “Bicameral Trade Authority Act of 2019,” legislation that would amend Section 232 of the Trade Expansion Act:

“CAMMU strongly supports the Bicameral Trade Authority Act of 2019 as it would help ensure that tariffs are only imposed under Section 232 for truly national security purposes. Importantly, the legislation could potentially revoke the Section 232 steel and aluminum tariffs that continue to cause damage to millions of workers in the U.S. manufacturing sector.

“U.S. companies continue to be hurt by the Section 232 steel and aluminum tariffs, paying hundreds of dollars more per ton for steel than their overseas competitors. This has resulted in lost business opportunities. In addition, the domestic steel industry cannot produce enough steel to meet demand, meaning that U.S. steel-users are seeing longer and longer delivery times from their steel U.S. suppliers, contributing to uncertainty and lost business.

“CAMMU thanks Senators Pat Toomey (R-PA) and Mark Warner (D-VA), and Representatives Ron Kind (D-WI), Mike Gallagher (R-WI), Darin LaHood (D-IL) and Jimmy Panetta (D-CA) for their leadership in introducing the Bicameral Trade Authority Act.”

A one-page summary of the bill can be accessed here, and a PDF of the legislation is available here. CAMMU is a signatory with other organizations representing manufacturing, farming and consumers to a letter in support of the proposed legislation, expected to be formally introduced later this week.  The letter can be viewed here.

Latest in Trade Cases

Leibowitz: Trump 2.0 signals Cold War 2.0 trade and China policies

China is one of the elephants in the room as the transition to Trump 2.0 continues. While the people and policies are still being formulated, it’s possible to detect a strategy for the new Trump administration. I think there are two imperative issues that the new administration needs to balance. The Trump strategy will, I believe, follow the following points. First, trade is one of the issues that got President Trump elected in 2016 and 2024—it nearly got him elected in 2020, save for the pandemic. If President Trump had won in 2020, I might be writing chronicles about the end of his eight years in the White House now instead of projecting what the next Trump administration would accomplish or break. Oh, well—that’s life. Trade will necessarily be a key feature of relations with China for the next four years.