Transcript of Rep. André Carson's Opening Statement from Hearing on Import Controls: Tools to Counter the CCP's Industrial Policy and Supply Chain Threats

WASHINGTON – Today, the House Select Committee on the Strategic Competition Between the United States and the Chinese Communist Party held a hearing titled Import Controls: Tools to Counter the CCP's Industrial Policy and Supply Chain Threats. The hearing examined U.S. market restriction and import control policies, examples of how those policies have been used, and how they can be paired with industrial policy to strengthen U.S. manufacturing.

The following witnesses provided testimony:

• Mr. Peter Harrell, Visiting Scholar, Georgetown University Institute of International Economic Law; Senior Fellow, Council on Foreign Relations
• Mr. Craig Singleton, China Program Senior Director, Foundation for Defense of Democracies

• Mr. Oren Cass, Founder and Chief Economist, American Compass

   

Below is a transcript of the opening statement from Representative André Carson. 

Mr. Chairman, thank you, and thank you to our witnesses for being here today.

For years, this Committee has led the debate on how to use market access policies to safeguard national security and counter the Chinese Communist Party’s dominance across critical sectors like telecommunications, drones, autos, robotics, solar, shipbuilding, batteries, and critical minerals.

These are powerful tools when used correctly. But today I want to press on a question I don't think we ask often enough: when we restrict a Chinese product or company from the U.S. market, how do we ensure American industry and workers can fill the gap?

Market restrictions on their own do not create an industry. If we restrict Chinese cranes, drones, or connected vehicles and nothing is standing behind that restriction to support American innovation, workers, and manufacturing, all we will have done is just changed our supplier—swapped Chinese firms for whichever foreign competitor is fastest to move into the gap we opened.

Take ZPMC cranes. When the Biden Administration restricted Chinese-manufactured port cranes on national security grounds, it paired that restriction with real investment in domestic crane manufacturing. That should be the model.

The goal cannot simply be "not China." It has to be building durable American and allied capacity in the sectors that matter most to our economic and national security. That means focusing on a suite of policies I like to call “economic patriotism.”

It includes smart policies like procurement preferences that give scale to firms making the leap; tax credits that de-risk capital; federal R&D that gets technology out of the lab; and maybe most importantly workforce investments that produce the welders, machinists, and engineers to actually run these plants.

I also want to make clear that restricting access to the world's largest consumer market has real consequences for businesses trying to plan, for workers whose jobs depend on supply chains we're reshaping, and for consumers who might pay the price of scarcity before American capacity catches up. This policy toolkit has real tradeoffs and should be used sparingly to address the greatest threats to the U.S., not settle political spats.

Additionally, Congress needs visibility into how these authorities are actually being used as a matter of course. That means reporting requirements with clear, public criteria for how designations get made and regular reviews of whether a restriction is actually achieving the security and economic goals it was built for.

I'll close with this. These tools — restrictions, tariffs, export controls — are not meant to be used to settle personal feuds between heads of state or as leverage in some unrelated negotiation. When they are, it doesn't just look bad. It actually undermines the credibility and effectiveness of the tools themselves, here and with our allies who we need standing beside us on this. Used well, market restrictions are one piece of a serious industrial strategy. Used carelessly, or for the wrong reasons, they're just noise that costs American businesses and workers real money.

I look forward to hearing from our witnesses on how we get this balance right. Thank you, and I yield back.

###