Each side in the debate over the steel tariffs President Bush imposed 18 months ago claims its case is bolstered by the midpoint review of the controversial program. Although the U.S. International Trade Commission's report may give Bush the intellectual cover to justify whatever decision he makes on the tariffs' future, many observers say politics, not economics, will play a bigger role in whether the fees on steel imports are maintained, weakened or lifted.

"There's one thing on [Bush's] mind: re-election. He is looking at Pennsylvania, Ohio, any states that he could lose," said Brigham Young University professor Earl Fry, a former special assistant to the U.S. trade representative. "These guys are very brutal about politics. They're not going to let good sense economics stand in the way."

Anyone willing to listen to steel trade economics should be prepared for a good head spinning. Bush imposed the three-year regimen of tariffs in March 2002 after the industry complained that a spate of bankruptcies was caused by cheap imports. Tariffs were imposed on a limited amount of steel products from certain countries, raising the price of imported steel by as much as 30 percent in the first 12 months, 24 months in the second year and 18 percent in the final year, which begins in March.

The protection was intended to give bankrupt steelmakers enough time to get back on their feet by merging, shedding billions in pension and health-care costs, and negotiating lower-cost union contracts. Steelmakers say they've done everything Bush expected.

"The program has worked exactly as intended. The industry has done a tremendous job of restructuring," said U.S. Steel Chairman Thomas J. Usher.

Steel users tell another story.

"As soon as the tariffs hit, contracts were broken, problems with steel quality and delivery began to appear and prices shot up," said Richard Clayton, president of Textron Fastening Systems, an automotive industry supplier.

Analysts say steel prices did spike in the first few months after Bush acted, but not because of the tariffs. A number of troubled steel producers including LTV Steel, a major automotive supplier, halted production early last year because of economic problems. The resulting shortage sent steel prices sharply higher. Since then, prices have subsided to the point where most steel is now cheaper to buy in the United States than in Europe or Asia.

Wilbur Ross, the New York financier who led the rescue of LTV and Bethlehem Steel, says protection from imports has done the industry a world of good without having a major impact on the economy.

"It was a rounding error in terms of its effect on the U.S. economy," said Ross, chairman of International Steel Group. "If [Bush] decides on the facts, we'll be fine."

By law, Bush doesn't have to do anything with the ITC report, which he received Sept. 19. Some say that may be the best policy.

"If he does something, he's just going to tick off everybody," said Roger Schagrin, a Washington, D.C., attorney who represents domestic producers in trade cases involving imports.

Like many industry observers, Schagrin didn't expect Bush to do anything until after Nov. 10. That's when the World Trade Organization, which declared the tariffs illegal in July, is expected to rule on the industry's appeal of that decision. What card the WTO plays will influence Bush's response, Schagrin said. He didn't think the tariffs were the big political issue some have made them out to be.

"I think the White house has a lot more important political things to worry about than the steel tariffs. I just don't think it's high on their political radar screen," he said.

That could change if the crisis in manufacturing, where more than 2 million jobs have disappeared during Bush's term, becomes more of a hot-button campaign issue, said G. Terry Madonna, a Millersville University professor and political analyst. Some expect the Democrats, who capitalized on economic problems when Bush's father was in the White House, to try to do the same this time around.

"The Democrats certainly see trade as an issue -- at least many of the Democratic candidates. My sense is the [Bush] administration is starting to get nervous about it," said Frederick Mayer, a Duke University professor who specializes in trade.

Just as tariff proponents and opponents continue to hash out the economics of the issue, the administration weighs the political consequences of how its decision will play in Pennsylvania, Ohio and other states expected to play a key role in the outcome of the 2004 presidential vote.

"The political cost/benefit analysis has not been made yet," said Lloyd O'Carroll, a metals analyst with BB&T Capital Markets. "Whenever they have [made it], we'll have a decision."