Comment: The Buy .American Act: Examination. Analysis and Comparison

I. INTRODUCTION

The Buy American Act a1 1933. as modified by Enecurire Order 10582, grants a preference to domestic manulaccurers offering domestic products when goods are sought for goternmental use. This article \rill trace the legislative history of the Act, its development up to and includine the 1949-1954 anti-act movement, and culminate with the imp& of the 1954 Executive Order. The arricle will then locus on the Armed Services Procurement Regulations (as they apply ro the Buy .American .Act of 19331 and procurement practices utilized by the Department of Defense. The text will discuss the major exceptions to application of the buy-at-home policy, specifically the Canadian and liorwegian exceptions. The article will then enter rhe international arena, examining first the buy-national prorisions of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade. and second, the hlort-Favored Nations Clause. These provisions will be considered wirh the previous discussion of the Canadian-1-orwegian exception to the Buy lmerican Act and a derermination will be made as to whether present procurement practices are inconsistent with these international commitments. Finally. the paper wll examine c'orernmenr procurement practices in Europe. North America, a d

Japan, looking specifically ar the requirements indiridiial countries have specifiFd for prosirecrire suppliers and the different wr. if any, that these countries treat a foreign bidder as opposed td a domestic bidder at the rime of award or solicitation.

" Thrs oriicle ads tcd from a thew preienred to The Judge Adiacate

B S. 1967, Unrred Sntei ilhnry Acadern). JD 1972. Villrnoia Unrreriiry.

Odce of the Staff Judse Adiocare, Unmd Srerei Army Alirki

The study doer not CIKICIZC the Acr's concept. but rather so

aspects of its application. The administration of the .Act ~n cert areas deiears its intended purpose, while in other m a s ,idmi tratire bureaucracy prevents the smooch and efficient operanon ofthe I c r by complicated and inaccurate restout that, although the Act and its applifaults are not of sufficient magnitude to prrrent KS conceprual basis from being the most equitable in grant in^ domestic preference mworld trade markets.

II THF mm .i\icRIc.is ACT

From 1920 through 1933, rhe United Kingdom. hopine to itimu-late a sagging postwi.ar economy, established Buy-Brmsh'pihcy for all niilterials and supplies to be used in public projects? In \Vashinson, the United States Congress heard horh Represenratii ei and Senators seek protective legolatmn for domestic industrr and lahor ro combat the British policy.2 XGth the economic plight of rhe Sarion squarely upon his shoulders, President Hoover sent 2 niei-sage to the Speaker of the House. \Ir. John Nance Garner. suggesting tharlrutinc~r ~ I E

from rime 10 rme I" the pmurmenr of supplier and

10 vnrerionrble COSTS.

13 nor unreasonable. purchase or COIYBC~ tor the delirerr of ~rli~lescf the

growth. pmducoon or mrnuiacruir ai the Lhied Stares. narunhmndmg char ~ r u ~ l e oi forreign ongin may be oeeied at h e r pnce

BUY AMERICAN ACT

As a result af the President's strong support for what would be known as buy-national legislation, Congressional bill hoppers over-flawed with proposed legislation. ,Many of the proposed bills, however, were accurately described by Representative Granfield when he stated that.

There are, hoierer, certam bills before the commioae which are mdrarric and "shoot beyond the mark." so to sped. T h w bills require ?heheads of rhe merai pc~~nmenraldepmentr to pmhrre "only ~IIICI~S and maiensli grown or prcdvccd and mvlvfacolred in the United Starer."

While this language gwr preference in the pvrchve of domritic articlesto rhc Government. ir would in some ~ N ~ C E S interfere with the righrrof the Goaernmcnt ID purchirc ~rdclcr mnnviicolrid by American capirrland labor from raw mitiriili of foreign growrh. There IS serious objectionto the language, "ut~cles md miterrdr gmwn or produced and manufac-w e d in the United S t m d Thb Iingusge ought to be changed IO conform with rhc languige employed by the President. . . 4

Accompanying these ultra-restrictive proposals was voluminous testimony by the interest groups most benefited by the prapasals. These interest groups espoused viewpoints that. although not as relevant then because of the very small Federal badget. are very relevant today. lh Pugh, of the Common Brick Llanufacturers Association of America, commented that the money expended under Federal appropriations was supposed t...

If you are already a vLex customer, Access Here