Witnesses from Kentucky, Minnesota, Maryland, Michigan, Maine, Ohio and Wisconsin explained to a cameraman from the Alliance for American Manufacturing (AAM) that they told the U.S. International Trade Commission during its hearing on coated paper imports this week that it must balance trade so that America can return to exporting products, not jobs.
The lawmakers, businessmen and paper workers spoke in favor of placing countervailing duties of coated paper from China and Indonesia because those countries violate international trade rules by subsidizing those exports, which unfairly makes the paper so cheap, American companies cannot compete.
Brady Nelson, president of United Steelworkers (USW) Local 1163 at Sappi Fine Paper in Minnesota, was one of about 20 Steelworkers who attended the hearing. He thanked the lawmakers from across the country who testified.
Traci Snider, who has worked for 29 years at NewPage, USW Local 676 in Maryland, said that without those NewPage jobs, most people in her area would not have employment that could support families.
U.S. Rep. Chellie Pingree, D- Maine, said the U.S. paper companies make high quality product,s and the U.S. has the essential natural resources. “If the Chinese government goes in there and subsidizing the paper costs, we have no way we can compete.” It is not okay to be dumping coated paper, she added. “We need to stand up for this principal and the jobs.”
U.S. Rep. Michael Michaud, a Democrat from Maine and former United Steelworker who worked 29 years at a paper company, said he told the trade commission how the dumping of coated paper affects three mills in Maine, the workers and their communities.
U.S. Rep. Dr. Steve Kagen, a Democrat from Wisconsin whose district includes Paper Valley, testified at the hearing and said afterward, “China has been cheating. Indonesia has been cheating. They have stolen our American jobs overseas, and it is time for that to end.”
My union, the United Steelworkers (USW), and three paper manufacturers will have free traders and editorial boards across the nation sputtering, spitting and name calling again this week.
They started labeling us “protectionist” last week when President Obama made what should have been considered a straightforward decision. He implemented a recommendation from the independent, bi-partisan International Trade Commission (ITC) to place tariffs on tires imported from China. The USW had started that process by seeking sanctions in April under special trade safeguard rules, called Section 421, which the Chinese had agreed to obey to gain entrance to the World Trade Organization.
Now we’ve filed a new trade case. We did it with no disrespect or lack of hospitality toward Chinese officials as they arrived in the city of our international headquarters – Pittsburgh – for the G-20 summit. Proof of that is we included as a defendant in this case China’s fellow G-20 country of Indonesia, who can keep them company in court.
This is not a Section 421 but a more traditional unfair trade case about coated paper, the kind used for car brochures and annual reports. In 2007, the U.S. Department of Commerce found egregious dumping of this paper and improper subsidies by the Chinese and Indonesian governments. But later the ITC refused to impose sanctions because it decided the U.S. industry hadn’t been adequately injured.
We believe we’ve suffered sufficiently now.
But we know the free traders and editorial boarders will vilify us. They’ve taken up with the Chinese government. And let me be clear that I mean government. The USW is in solidarity with Chinese and Indonesian workers who suffer abuse at the hands of their employers. It is governmental policies that injure us both and that we oppose. Our intent is to hold governments to promises they made to abide by international trade regulations – pledges sworn to gain entrance to the World Trade Organization.
Those rules were meant to make free trade fair.
We want fair trade. Geez. They’ll call us “protectionist” for that – like they did with the tire tariff decision. The New York Times derided the tire tariff a “protectionist remedy.” The Chicago Tribune slammed it as “blatantly protectionist.” A Wall Street Journal columnist said Obama imposed the tariff, not because it was recommended by the ITC, but because the president “owed favors to his friends in Big Labor.”
These people don’t know what they are talking about. The New York Times, for example, said, “China has not been competing unfairly on tires – just more effectively, mainly because of its far lower labor costs.”
It is unfair trade to abuse workers by not paying them your own country’s minimum wage, by failing to give them your own country’s required days off and other benefits, by exposingthem to grossly hazardous working conditions. Has the New York Times investigated the Chinese tire workers’ situation, the way it has other Chinese workers’, to determine if they are being mistreated in these ways like so many Chinese workers? If so, it provided no evidence.
In addition, just two paragraphs later, the Times lists numerous unfair trading practices it acknowledges China engages in, practices that give it unfair advantages when selling tires on the U.S. market, including manipulating its currency. Those advantages are far more significant to the price of tires than labor costs.
Similarly, the Chicago Tribune editorial was written by someone who apparently did precious little research. It claims the tire tariffs will cause “whopping price hikes,” even though Charles Uthus, vice president of the Automotive Trade Policy Council, which opposed sanctions, calculated that the additional cost per tire, at the tariffs recommended by the ITC but later lowered by Obama, would be no more than $3.50. The Tribune says the tariffs will not bring jobs back home – but the ITC determined they would. Best of all, the Tribune asserts that the tariffs will prompt manufacturers to move production from China to countries without tariffs. Really? Tariffs that will last only three years will prompt manufacturers to abandon plants that cost $180 million to build?
These people are in love with an ideal: Free trade. It doesn’t exist between the U.S. and China. The rules of free trade prohibit subsidizing exports, forcing foreign investors to transfer technology and mandating foreign manufacturers export all products made in the host country. China so routinely does such prohibited stuff that Cooper Tire provided sworn testimony about it in our Section 421 case. Cooper testified that China required Cooper to export all of the tires from its new Chinese plant for five years.
China cheats. We’re just asking that they follow the rules they agreed to when they joined the World Trade Organization – the same sort of rules they will be discussing this week at the G-20. That’s not protectionism.
The free traders and the editorial boarders also belittled the tire case because none of the tire companies joined the USW. It should be obvious why companies like Cooper could not. And let’s make it clear, Goodyear, which has agreed to invest $600 million in its U.S. plants, made a point of remaining neutral.
In the paper case, the free traders are going to have to choke back that scorn. Three manufacturers are in it with us: Appleton Coated LLC, NewPage Corp., and Sappi Fine Paper North America . Two of them, Sappi and NewPage, have been forced to close plants in the two years since the ITC didn’t see enough damage in the U.S. market to impose sanctions in 2007. Those shut downs cost nearly 1,000 workers their jobs and severely injured the mill towns of Muskegon, Mich., and Kimberly, Wis.
Don’t just take my word, the word of someone who the Wall Street Journal would dismiss as “protectionist Big Labor,” owed a big favor by President Obama. Listen to what businessmen have to say about China and Indonesia:
This is John Cappy, president and CEO of Appleton, “Our goal is to restore fair competition to the marketplace. We are willing to compete with anyone on a fair playing field.”
Here is Rick Willett, president and CEO of NewPage talking about China, “What we want here is simply enforcement of the rules they signed on to in order to be part of the World Trade Organization.”
And, finally, there’s Mark Gardner, president and CEO of Sappi, who explains that his company clearly believes in free trade because it imports paper made in its European mills to the United States as well as manufacturing paper here: “We want the laws enforced so we can compete on a fair basis.”
President Obama deserves credit for making a tough call on trade. On September 11, he decided to impose tariffs on consumer tires from China for the next three years, resisting the pleas of most opinion elites across the nation and one of the principal financiers of our massive public debt: China’s government.
Though many industries have been battered by imports from China, the safeguard mechanism permitted under rules China agreed to upon entering the World Trade Organization eight years ago has never been invoked before this month. While the merits of the trade case filed by the United Steelworkers (USW) union seeking relief from a massive surge of imported Chinese consumer tires were quite clear, an absurd mythology has encompassed it.
Even though the International Trade Commission (ITC) recommended tariffs after hearing copious evidence from importers and the Chinese tire industry as well as from the USW (which represent tire workers), opponents of the tariffs still insist that the decision will be counterproductive, raising prices while creating jobs in other importing nations. That is complete nonsense. No other exporter can replace the market share of consumer tires that China currently holds. Goodyear has indicated that it will invest $600 million in its American tire manufacturing facilities, making it highly likely that the tariffs will allow for some capital investments in the domestic tire industry and put tire workers back on the job. Prices for tires—if they rise at all—will increase by $3 per tire according to the ITC, while the economic benefits to the nation, in the form of jobs and wages saved, taxes paid, and corporate profits—will more than double that.
Some critics of the tariffs have pointed to potential retaliation by China against U.S.-produced chicken feet and auto parts. This is merely bluster by Beijing, which is not normally held to account on trade issues. For eight years, China has not faced serious sanctions for a beggar-thy-neighbor, mercantilist trade policy. But remember this: China depends on access to the U.S. market for its own employment and growth, and will not ultimately risk its livelihood to make a point.
Others believe that the outcome of this case will lead to the filing of even more import surge cases against China by industries such as textiles or steel. The sad fact is that scores of American industries have seen an import surge from China. While a few more cases may be in the offing, a far more likely outcome of the tire case is a serious bilateral negotiation between the U.S. and China to address a number of trade irritants, such as massive industrial subsidies, lack of market access, intellectual property theft, persistent dumping, and an exchange rate that most economists believe is dramatically undervalued and misaligned.
Does anyone still believe it is a good thing to outsource not only our manufacturing but also our debt financing to China? The tire decision alone will not change this equation, but it could chart a better course for America.
Revitalizing manufacturing, reducing our trade imbalances and bringing down our public debt are interconnected. The tire trade decision alone will not accomplish these goals, but it may lead lawmakers to embrace a new strategy to grow manufacturing in this nation. Trade enforcement as articulated by President Obama is an essential component of that strategy, but it is only part of the equation. We need a results-oriented trade policy, one that recognizes the importance of opening new markets as well as enforcing the rules. It is refreshing to see a pragmatic national leader on trade after so many years of benign neglect.
***
This piece was first published in the Detroit News.
Tire, tariff, free trade, fair trade, manufacturing, President Barack Obama, China, United Steelworkers, USW, World Trade Organization, International Trade Commission, ITC, exports, Goodyear,
These are special trade safeguard rules, called “Section 421,” that the Chinese had agreed to obey to gain entrance to the World Trade Organization (WTO). They are, however, laws that had gone unenforced by the U.S. in the past.
President Obama used these safeguard rules to imposed tariffs on tires manufactured in China and imported into the U.S., following a recommendation by the International Trade Commission, an independent, bi-partisan group. The action made Obama the first president to execute sanctions under “Section 421.”
The International Trade Commission recommended sanctions under “Section 421” four times before Obama took office. Nothing was done. The result was closed American factories, lost American manufacturing jobs, diminished American dreams.
Not this time though. Not this president. Obama showed he’s made of tougher stuff. By placing tariffs on imported Chinese tires, President Obama put himself in the line of fire for the jobs of U.S. workers, for the preservation of U.S. manufacturing and, ultimately, for the stabilization of the U.S. economy.
Don’t kid yourself. This is a battle. For the U.S. to maintain a viable economy, it must sustain a strong manufacturing base. It must make products of value that can be sold here and overseas – not just swap paper, some of it bogus on Wall Street.
The U.S. economy is under attack by countries engaging in unfair trade. In the past decade, we’ve lost 40,000 manufacturing facilities. In just the 21 months since the Great Recession began, more than 2 million manufacturing workers have lost their jobs, making their unemployment rate 11.8 percent, significantly higher than the 9.7 percent rate for the average worker.
That’s what the Chinese tire case was all about. My union, the United Steelworkers (USW) filed it in April. We demanded penalties against China because it has smothered the U.S. market with tires. In 2004, its share of the U.S market was 4.7 percent. Four years later, it was 16.7 percent. In that time, the number of tires it sold rose from 14.6 million to 46 million. As a result, four U.S. tire manufacturing plants closed and 5,100 workers lost their jobs. Another three plants will close before year’s end, throwing 3,000 more U.S. workers on the street.
We filed for relief under “Section 421” for two reasons. One is that it provides quicker relief than other trade remedies. The other is that China consented to its provisions. When China wanted to get into the World Trade Organization in 2000, it secured U.S. support by agreeing to abide by Section 421 until 2013. Section 421 was designed to protect the U.S. economy by providing ways to combat unfair and damaging surges of particular Chinese imports.
In the past, corporations had asked for Section 421 tariffs. And we had joined them. This time, not one tire company joined us, though, to be clear, Goodyear was openly neutral. By contrast, Ohio-based Cooper, fought us. As did a collection of rag-tag import firms, one of which had nearly gone bankrupt after importing defective Chinese tires that had to be recalled after a series of crashes.
Cooper, in testimony to the International Trade Commission, reported that all of the tires it makes at its Chinese plant, under its licensing agreement with the Chinese, must be exported until May, 2012. So it has a clear financial interest in preventing tariffs on imported tires to the U.S. The tire import companies have the same interest. For them, it’s about the money they make today, no matter how or where it’s made. They’ve got no allegiance to the U.S. and don’t care what happens to America’s future manufacturing capability or financial stability.
President Obama, by contrast, is a patriot who sees the big picture and takes the long view. U.S. Sen. Sherrod Brown of Ohio was right when he said after the tire tariffs were announced:
“Today the President courageously stood up and enforced fair trade rules that will save jobs and help our communities. Since China joined the World Trade Organization, American workers have not been assured that the government would defend them against unfair trade. With this “Section 421” decision, President Obama has taken the side of American workers and manufacturers.
“Rigorous trade enforcement is a major piece of our manufacturing and global competitiveness strategy. If American workers and manufacturers are going to compete in the global market, they need to have a government that uses trade enforcement tools, including the Section 421 safeguard.”
American workers and American manufacturers can compete – when trade is fair. It’s unfair when countries don’t enforce their own labor regulations, including their own minimum wage laws. It’s unfair when U.S. companies abide by strict environmental regulations and those in other countries openly pollute air and water. It’s unfair when other countries allow their firms to steal trade secrets, when other countries demand that firms export all of their products for a certain number of years and when other countries manipulate the value of their currencies.
If trade laws aren’t enforced, America will lose virtually all manufacturing and become nothing but a dumping ground – a place where the rest of the world sells the stuff it makes. Fewer and fewer citizens in that America would be able to buy stuff after the factories close and all the jobs that they support disappear.
In announcing the tire trade sanctions — tariffs of 35 percent for a year beginning Sept. 26, 30 percent for a year after that, and 25 percent in the final year — U.S. Trade Representative Ron Kirk said, “Enforcing trade laws is key to maintaining an open and free trading system.”
Unfair trade isn’t free.
President Obama is bold enough to draw that line of distinction for America.
They came first for the Communists, And I didn’t speak up because I wasn’t a Communist. Then they came for the Jews, And I didn’t speak up because I wasn’t a Jew. Then they came for the trade unionists, And I didn’t speak up because I wasn’t a trade unionist. Then they came for the Catholics, And I didn’t speak up because I was Protestant. Then they came for me, And by that time no one was left to speak up.
–Martin Niemoeller
China is attacking the U.S. with a stealth weapon of mass economic destruction – unfair trade. U.S. corporations – and China – that profiteer from it prefer to label this “free trade.”
Butindustrial carnage is the only way to describe the devastation done to the U.S. economy by an accumulatedtrillion dollar trade deficit with China, the destruction of U.S. jobs by off-shoring them to China, and the disintegration of the U.S. industrial sector that is foreclosing America’s ability to support itself or to manufacture weapons to defend itself.
The United Steelworkers union is challenging China and the profiteers. It has demanded imposition of duties and tariffs on imported Chinese products – not because the U.S. can’t compete but because China cheats.
We’ve watched our members lose their jobs as steel mills idled, paper plants closed, and tire factories shuttered. In this war, China came for our jobs. Virtually no one spoke up for displaced blue collar workers. Perhaps you don’t wear a blue collar. A white one will prove no special shield. The Chinese will come for your job too.
In this struggle, it is crucial to understand that so-called free trade isn’t some lofty capitalist ideal. The U.S. engages in “free trade” with the Chinese because they hold $1 trillion in debt over our heads, an obligation they know we can’t pay. We shrink in fear of them. They’re world class bullies. They can do whatever they please. And they do. They violate international trade laws by which we abide. That’s why their stuff is so cheap. The one factor on which the price difference always is blamed – labor costs – is only the tiniest fraction of it.
Labor violations are part of the cheating. The National Labor Committee and others, including reporters from the New York Times, have documented exploitation of Chinese workers that can only be described as modern slavery. We stand in solidarity with these workers and condemn these atrocities that include very young teenagers kept in locked buildings with caged windows where they are forced to labor 14-hour shifts under grueling conditions, but find it impossible to make money or to amass the “exit fee” required to leave. They include children, women, and occasionally men kidnapped and forced to work in brick kilns, coal mines, and sweatshops in the Chinese hinterlands, with no payment other than gruel and a sleeping mat. When Chinese companies treat humans this way, they realize a competitive advantage over American firms that routinely obey humanitarian laws.
China is also one of the most dangerous places in the world to work and live because corporations fail to provide safety equipment for workers, such as dust control devices, and refuse to protect the environment with pollution control equipment. Both practices are profitable for Chinese corporations, particularly when competing with U.S. firms, which must abide by environmental and worker health and safety regulations.
Much more significant, however, are other deliberate Chinese interventions in the market, such as the undervaluation of its currency, subsidization of its manufacturing, counterfeiting, forced transfer of American technology, and refusal to give American companies access to Chinese markets with licensing restrictions, complex regulations and local content rules.
China gives breaks to manufacturers on land, rent, energy and water. Manufacturers may receive bank “loans” they know they’re not required to repay. China also exempts certain industries from income taxes and gives tax rebates on exports.
China’s deliberate currency undervaluation works as a subsidy as well. The U.S.-China Economic and Security Review Commission explains it this way: “China’s undervalued currency encourages undervalued Chinese exports to the U.S. and discourages U.S. exports because U.S. exports are artificially overvalued. As a result, undervalued Chinese exports have been highly disruptive to the U.S.”
China cheats. Free trade is a myth. The American worker doesn’t need special treatment. We’re the most productive in the world. We just seek fair competition. We want fair trade. The USW wants trade rules enforced.
So the union demands it. Repeatedly, we’ve won cases seeking imposition of anti-dumping and anti-subsidy duties on unfairly traded imports from China to protect our members. There was the glossy paper case in 2007 and the lightweight thermal paper case in 2008. The USW and four U.S. stainless pipe producers won a final order from the U.S. International Trade Commission in February on dumped Chinese welded austenitic stainless steel pressure pipe. Just two months later, the USW joined seven U.S. companies in seeking duties on imported Chinese welded and stainless steel pipes used in oil and gas extraction because of massive Chinese government subsidies.
But it’s the tire case that’s causing the commotion. That’s because the USW filed it under “Section 421,” which is supposed to allow the U.S. to combat unfair and damaging surges of particular Chinese imports. China agreed to abide by Section 421 until 2013 in exchange for support from the U.S. when it sought to join the World Trade Organization in 2001.The advantage of Section 421 is that the process is quicker that a typical trade case.
U.S. companies won four Section 421 cases previously, including the McWane Inc. ductile iron waterworks fittings case in 2003, in which the USW testified. The International Trade Commission recommended in the McWane case and the three others that former President George W. Bush penalize Chinese imports. He did nothing – refusing to protect U.S. industry.
But it’s a new day, with a new president. Thus the ruckus. If President Barack Obama adopts the recommendations of the International Trade Commission to use Section 421 to shield American tire manufacturers from unfair trade and preserve American jobs, more cases will quickly follow. That is what China and the corporate profiteers fear.
The USW filed the Section 421 tire case to defend the 15,000 rubber workers who we represented across North America. And we stood alone. No one spoke up for the tire workers. These U.S. workers watched during the past five years as Chinese tire imports increased 215 percent, making China the single largest source of consumer tire imports in the U.S. In that time, 5,000 U.S. rubber workers lost their jobs. Another 3,000 know they’ll get the boot by year’s end.
America’s increased trade deficits with China since it entered the World Trade Organization have cost 2.3 million workers their jobs or job displacements, according to The China Trade Toll by Robert E. Scott of the Economic Policy Institute.
Most were manufacturing jobs, but, among them, Scott reports, were 127,710 professional, scientific and technical services workers. There were 66,986 managers of companies and enterprises. They even included 13,141 arts, entertainment and recreation workers.
A group of tire importers that should be competitors banded together recently to ally themselves with China in a trade case.
Doesn’t sound like they’re working for the interests of the United States, does it? No, they’re not. They’re collaborating with China against American manufacturing in general and American tire workers, represented by the United Steelworkers, in particular.
They’re opposing the union’s petition seeking a limit on the flood of Chinese tires that has so overwhelmed the U.S. market in the past five years that six American tire plants closed and nearly 7,000 American workers lost their jobs.
China cheats in international trade. It does so by manipulating its currency and subsidizing its manufacturing, which results in lower prices for its exports. For the tire importers, calling themselves the American Coalition for Free Trade in Tires, China cheating means higher profits.
After taking up with China, these companies are not the American Coalition of anything. They’re the Chutzpah Coalition. Here’s the quote that explains why: “If you impose quotas, you harm American jobs because of the impact on all of the people that work for independent dealers.” The Chutzpah Coalition lawyer, Jim Jochum of Jochum, Shore & Trossevim had the lack of insight to say that.
What we have here are tire import companies that grew and profited at the cost of American tire plants and American workers now asserting that if they are forbidden from importing limitless tires, then the result will be terribly wrong and unfair because some of their importing jobs might have to be cut.
If imports are limited, preserving thousands of American tire workers’ jobs, here’s what Del-Nat president Jim Mayfield asked at the Chutzpah Coalition press conference, “What’s supposed to happen to my company and my workers?” A call to Del-Nat asking for the total number of employees got this response: 68.
That’s chutzpah.
For those unfamiliar with Yiddish, chutzpah is not generally considered a positive attribute. The typical definition goes something like this: A boy kills his parents then seeks the court’s mercy because he’s an orphan.
In dealing with the Chinese and this coalition, there’s reason to believe chutzpah can be deadly. Chinese manufacturers are notorious for cutting corners in ways that proved lethal to consumers. Babies, cats and dogs have all died from melamine-laced milk and pet food from China. In another case, the Chinese manufacturer of Aqua Dots substituted a chemical, which when ingested reacted like the “date rape” drug, forcing a recall of the toy after it sickened American children who put the dots in their mouths, and caused at least one youngster to end up in a coma.
And then there’s the tire case. On Aug. 12, 2006, four Philadelphia carpenters were driving home after work when the treads on one of the Chinese-made tires on their van separated. The rollover crash that followed killed two of the men and permanently impaired a third. An investigation showed that the tires, imported by Foreign Tire Sales – one of the members of the Chutzpah Coalition – did not contain a gum strip between belts necessary to prevent tread separation.
Initially, when the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration ordered Foreign Tire Sales to recall the defective tires, the company said it couldn’t afford to do that. Foreign Tire said it could pay only 10 to 15 percent of the approximately $80 million cost of recovering nearly half a million tires. Sure, it could profit from importing defective products. But it wasn’t prepared to pay to clean up the mess.
Later, it decided that only 255,000 tires needed to be returned. Ultimately, Foreign Tire was spared when drivers turned in fewer than 20,000 of those tires – less than 8 percent of the total. Who knows what happened to the remainder of those questionable tires or the people driving the cars they were on.
Foreign Tire, the Chutzpah Coalition and China want to continue importing freely – free trade not fair trade. And Chinese officials have taken steps to ensure that happens. Early in May, according to a report in the People’s Daily, China’s Vice Minister of Commerce met with U.S. Embassy personnel in Beijing “to negotiate on two trade remedy investigations targeting Chinese-made products that U.S. industries recently filed with the U.S. government.”
After that, the International Trade Commission released a memo revealing that Chinese officials attempted to discuss trade cases in a private meeting – a contact that was improper because other parties in these cases did not have an opportunity to argue their side. The ITC memo said China expressed particular concern about petitions filed under Section 421, the China-specific trade safeguard law that the USW used in the tire case.
Here’s what is at risk for China and their Chutzpah Coalition allies: in 2004 China sent 14 million tires to the U.S. valued at $453 million. By last year, that had increased to 46 million tires valued at $1.7 billion.
The USW wants the U.S. International Trade Commission to limit the imports to the 2005 level, which was 21 million. That number then could rise by five percent the following year, and five percent more the year after that.
Congress added Section 421 to the U.S. Trade Act in 2000 to give U.S. industries and workers an opportunity to obtain product-specific relief from sharp increases in imports from China. Section 421 could provide resolution more quickly than a dumping or countervailing duty case.
Another good reason to call this group of tire importers the Chutzpah Coalition is that in its news release, announcing its formation, it suggested it represented “thousands of Americans working in the tire industry.” Not likely. Two of the six members refused to say how many employees they have – Dunlap & Kyle Co., Inc. and Foreign Tire. But the total employed in the U.S. for the other four together: American Omni Trading Co.; Del-Nat Tire Corp.; Hercules Tire & Rubber Co. and Orteck Global Supply & Distribution Co., is 400.
That’s hardly “thousands of Americans.”
But they’ve cost 7,000 Americans their jobs. And they’re fine with that. They’re working hard every day to add more to that number.
