Reagan Urges House Not to Override Veto

WASHINGTON — President Reagan appealed to the House on Saturday not to override his veto of a tough Democratic trade bill, warning that its import restrictions would touch off foreign retaliation and destroy thousands of jobs.

But the bill’s Democratic author replied that import cuts are needed to protect jobs in the textile industry and “to put teeth into our trade agreements.”

The House vote on Reagan’s veto, scheduled for Wednesday, will be a major showdown on trade policy between protectionist Democrats and an Administration intent on preserving free trade despite the loss of U.S. jobs to imports.

The House bill calls for an enforced 30% cut in textile and clothing imports, a proposal Reagan vetoed last year. In order to override the veto, the Administration’s opponents need two-thirds of the votes in both the Democratic-led House and the Republican-controlled Senate.

Reagan, in his regular weekly radio address, conceded that the Democratic bill might save some jobs temporarily, but said the long-term cost would be greater than any benefits.

“These temporarily protected jobs would be more than offset by the loss of thousands of other jobs--jobs in retail marketing and finance and jobs directly related to importing, such as dockworkers and transportation workers,” Reagan said.

“And then there are all those who would be thrown out of work as we began to feel the effects of foreign retaliation--and you can bet there would be retaliation,” he said.

“Some of the first victims of retaliation would be our farmers, kicking them when they’re already down,” Reagan added.

Agreements With Teeth

Rep. Ed Jenkins (D-Ga.), author of the Democratic trade bill, responded that the Administration’s trade policies have failed to help U.S. industries overcome competition from abroad.

“The Administration allows us to be taken advantage of by unfair imports,” Jenkins charged.

He said the Democratic bill is intended “to put teeth into our trade agreements and to make the Administration enforce our treaties.”

“It is not a wildly protectionist bill as the Administration implies,” Jenkins said.

The Administration has taken pains to assert that it has cracked down on trading partners who block U.S. exports from their markets and subsidize their own exporting industries.

“We’ve aggressively used existing trade laws to pry open foreign markets and force others to play by the rules,” Reagan said Saturday.

Sales of Computer Chips

He pointed to last week’s agreement to increase U.S. sales of computer chips to Japan and the completion of a new multifiber trading pact that will allow the United States broader restrictions on textile imports.

But the Administration’s efforts have had little visible effect in the face of massive trade deficits and the continuing loss of jobs in industries vulnerable to imports.

Textile imports, for example, have risen at a 17% annual rate over the past five years, and the U.S. textile industry says 300,000 jobs have disappeared as a result. But U.S. Trade Representative Clayton K. Yeutter, in announcing the new textile agreement Friday, said it was aimed only at slowing the growth of imports.