Office of the Historian

324. Letter From Thirteen Senators to President Johnson1

Washington, October 3, 1966.

Dear Mr. President:

We are writing you to express our concern about the current status of the GATT negotiations as they relate to U.S. agriculture. We are especially concerned by reports in the European press that the EEC is attempting to incorporate support levels, reference prices, and compensatory levies for agricultural products into the GATT tariff structure. These measures are restrictive of trade; they are protectionist in essence, not trade liberalization.

The U.S. National Fruit Export Council has forcefully called this situation to our attention in the attached statement of the Council’s position.2 Also attached are data compiled by the Foreign Agricultural Service (1960–1965) showing the importance to the United States of fruit and vegetable exports to the EEC countries totalling about $91 million in 1965.3 The export market is an integral and essential part of the industry’s market. All sales of such products currently are for dollars, thereby contributing materially to the U.S. balance of payments position.

We have been gratified by the repeated assurances from your office and from Governor Herter during the course of these negotiations that the United States would not enter into any agreement which does not provide satisfactory conditions of access for U.S. farm products to these traditional markets. However, we are frankly concerned over reports that “overriding political considerations” may be put forward as justification for entering into an agreement which would damage the legitimate economic interests of the United States.

We believe the proposals of the EEC are in direct conflict with the philosophy of the Trade Expansion Act, and particularly section 252, wherein our opposition to “non-tariff trade restrictions”, “variable import fees” and other “unjustifiable foreign import restrictions” is clearly stated. The EEC proposals represent “policies unjustifiably restricting United States commerce.”

We urge that the United States remain steadfast in its adherence to the publicly announced policy that we must achieve reciprocity in these negotiations which must include access for United States agricultural products to foreign markets on an equitable basis as stated in section 252(a)(3) of the Act.

[Page 864]

The purpose and principle of the Trade Expansion Act must not be sacrificed to achieve an unmeaningful agreement which will not “… maintain and enlarge foreign markets for the products of United States agriculture, industry, mining and commerce;”.

With kind regards, we remain,

Yours truly,

  • George D. Aiken 4
  • Wayne Morse
  • Thomas H. Kuchel
  • Jennings Randolph
  • Milton R. Young
  • George Smathers
  • Spessard L. Holland
  • George Murphy
  • Warren G. Magnuson
  • Leverett Saltonstall
  • Daniel K. Inouye
  • Maurine B. Neuberger
  • Robert C. Byrd
  1. Source: Department of State, Central Files, FT 7 GATT. Unclassified. The letter is an enclosure to CA-2992 to 22 diplomatic missions, October 17, which informed the posts they could use “the letter informally to illustrate the scope of United States domestic pressures to assure continued access to Community markets.”↩
  2. See Document 321.↩
  3. Not printed.↩
  4. Printed from a copy that bears these typed signatures.↩