Southern lawmakers struggle to get help for textile industry

WASHINGTON - Southern lawmakers once sought help for the textile industry as a matter of simple fairness. While other industries enjoyed economic triumphs, textile plants were closing in record numbers.

Even a Congress usually reluctant to meddle with private business found sympathy for the textile manufacturers. The industry's lobbyists and congressional boosters were confident these sympathies would soon translate into money.

Then came the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, and a solid-turned-fragile American economy was pushed to the brink of disaster. No longer were the problems of the textile industry unique. All of a sudden, everybody else had these problems too.

And some textile supporters worry that things might get even worse if the United States tries to repay Pakistan for its help in the war on terrorism by relaxing tariffs on textile imports from that country.

``Textiles were having trouble before Sept. 11,'' said Rep. Howard Coble, R-N.C., chairman of the congressional textile caucus. ``They're probably just more easily shoved aside now.''

That might have been the case if not for a razor-thin House vote last month that, thanks to some intense behind-the-scenes bargaining, returned the textile industry to the spotlight.

President Bush had requested from Congress a freer hand in negotiating trade agreements. Under the trade promotion authority, Congress would be able to approve or reject deals but not amend them.

The House ultimately passed the bill, 215-214, but only after several Southern lawmakers threatened to block it unless they were given assurances that the textile industry would get some federal help.

Rep. Jim DeMint, R-S.C., switched his no vote to a yes on the floor after the top three House leaders signed a letter agreeing to many of his textile demands.

Among the concessions was a promise Congress would soon clarify the rules of a 2000 trade law that provides duty-free treatment for Caribbean clothing made of fabric ``wholly formed'' in the United States. DeMint wanted to make sure that requirement also applies to the dyeing and finishing of those fabrics a key business in his district.

The trade promotion bill, which the Senate will likely complete early this year, split the votes of textile-friendly House members who differed over whether the assurances were enough. Coble and many of his colleagues voted against it, and the industry's Washington lobby never endorsed it despite the promises.

``Our position was to try to get the administration to make some commitments that would help us,'' said Carlos Moore, executive vice president of the American Textile Manufacturers Institute. ``They made some commitments. We'll have to wait and see if they help us.''

Because of a crowded legislative plate, textile supporters know their ticket to a relief package is convincing lawmakers that other industries will benefit too. And the nationwide recession might actually increase their chances of landing one item high on their wish list.

Under current law, textile companies that incur huge losses can receive a tax refund based on profits earned in the previous two years. But because many of these companies have struggled much longer, the industry is seeking to extend the carryback period.

Some versions of an economic stimulus package Congress is considering would allow companies refunds on five-year-old profits. Textile workers are among the loudest voices crying for a 10-year period instead.

``I don't think five years is enough to save large portions of the textile industry from collapse,'' said Sen. Zell Miller, D-Ga.

Especially if Pakistan's leaders, who withstood local sentiment and joined the anti-terrorism cause, get relaxed tariffs on textile imports to the United States as a reward. The country claims more than 10,000 Pakistani textile workers have been laid off because importers and retailers have canceled orders, due in part to the war effort.

But Moore says Pakistan is one of the chief violators of U.S. trade law, and loosening the reigns could be catastrophic for the weakened American industry.

``It just seems very inequitable and unfair to ask an industry already hammered by Sept. 11 that you're going to have to be the donors again for our foreign policy needs,'' Moore said.

The Bush administration has been reluctant to barter away its ability to use Pakistani textiles as a bargaining chip. However, Commerce Secretary Don Evans sent lawmakers a letter before the trade vote promising to ``minimize the impact on the U.S. textile industry'' should Pakistan's tariffs be loosened.

But such a move could be costly to the administration. Should the Senate alter the trade bill, the House would have another chance to vote on it. That one-vote margin might not hold up if Bush ignores textile interests on the Pakistan question.

Rep. Robert Aderholt, an Alabama Republican, says it makes no sense to worry about Pakistan's economy when so many rural American towns are in trouble. Three VF apparel plants in his district are among those scheduled to close, costing Alabama about 2,700 jobs.

``Everybody realizes that in times of war, things are not normal,'' Aderholt said. ``But we should look at other aspects first.''

The loss of a textile plant can deal a blow to virtually every segment of a rural town.

When VNC Corporation, a dyeing and finishing company in Valdese, N.C., closed its doors, the entire town found itself buried in debt. The textile plant was the primary water user and the reason city manager Jeff Morse opted to expand the utility. Now, Valdese still has to pay the overhead water costs, even though it lost its biggest customer.

As a result, Valdese is one of two North Carolina towns that has agreed to hire a Washington lobbying firm to address these issues. Several others are considering joining the cause.