Rewriting The Export Administration Act PDF Download

The 108th Congress again is expected to consider legislation to rewrite or to reauthorize the Export Administration Act (EAA). In the 107th Congress, the Export Administration Act of 2001 (S. 149) was introduced on January 23, 2001. The Senate passed S. 149 on September 6, 2001 by a vote of 85-14. A companion version in the House, H.R. 2581, was introduced by Rep. Gilman on July 20, 2001. The House International Relations Committee reported the measure with 35 amendments on August 1. The House Armed Services Committee further amended H.R. 2581 and reported out the bill on March 6, 2002. The difficulty in passing a comprehensive rewrite of the EAA has resulted, in part, from the continuing tension between national security and commercial concerns. Industry groups, proponents of heightened export controls, the Administration, and Congress have all participated in the reauthorization debate. Export control legislation gives rise to difficult questions that are integral to the working and efficacy of the export control system. The first question is the extent to which technology can be controlled. Industry groups contend that global information age high-technology is virtually uncontrollable. For this reason, industry supports mass market and foreign availability criteria in the EAA reauthorization legislation to restrict controls on widely available products. Others contend that these criteria would gut current export control laws. Industry officials also state that exports of high technology enhance national security by providing funds for R & D with military applications. Opponents of this position claim that if additional funds for military R & D are necessary, Congress should appropriate funds. A second question concerns the target countries on which export controls are imposed. Foreign policy controls impose sanctions on countries for behavior the United States considers unacceptable. Debate over this provision echoes debate on the efficacy of economic sanctions. Discussion of multilateral controls reflects the belief that the current regime (the Wassenaar arrangement) is an ineffective tool to control dual-use exports. Policy differences over multilateral arrangements arise over whether the U.S. should impose unilateral controls as an example for other countries to follow or only impose controls in conjunction with other major exporting countries. A third question is whether the current bifurcated export control system is the optimal administrative arrangement in the post Cold War world. Critics of the current process contend that national security interests are harmed by the current procedures. Industry spokesmen approve of the Commerce Department's role in dual-use exports, but want to further streamline the process. Other policy prescriptions have been aired such as merging all export control functions into one agency or to de-emphasize the licensing process. Congress has numerous options concerning export control. It can consider the current bills, continue to extend EAA79, legislate piecemeal revisions or policy prescriptions, work to erect stronger multilateral controls, or to engage in a more comprehensive review of export control laws, or some combination of the above.