Posted by Jonathan Adler:
The Democratic Trade Agenda:
http://volokh.com/archives/archive_2006_12_31-2007_01_06.shtml#1167962588
Senator Max Baucus (D-MT), the incoming Finance Committee Chair, has
an [1]op-ed in today's W$J outlining his vision of "A Democratic Trade
Agenda." Is it a good one? That's hard to tell. Here's a taste:
At a time when our country's competitive strength depends
increasingly on an aggressive trade policy, Americans are far less
willing to embrace one. Many equate trade and globalization with
ballooning deficits, stagnating wages and layoffs. Meanwhile, even
as China and India have continued their economic reawakening,
America has lacked the leadership to tackle the associated
challenges through trade. U.S. policy has lurched frantically from
one trade agreement to the next, eking out just enough votes to
push each one through Congress.
Some think that the new Democratic congressional majority will be
bad for trade policy. While it is true that some candidates
criticized trade in their campaigns, I believe that the new
Congress will have both the desire and opportunity to renew U.S.
trade policy, with a unifying purpose that Americans can understand
and support. Through trade, we must bolster the nation's innovative
economy in an increasingly global marketplace. At the same time, we
must tackle with equal vigor the negative domestic consequences of
globalization, from trade deficits to job losses.
On the one hand, it's a good sign that Senator Baucus wants to renew
fast track authority and recognizes the importance of international
trade ot the American economy. On the other, the op-ed can hardly be
called a ringing endorsement of free trade, particularly insofar as it
endorses greater trade enforcement, increasing export subsidies, and
greater dilution of free trade principles with labor and environmental
concerns.
[2]Dan Drezner's take (and hbe knows more about trade policy than I
do) is that the article is ambiguous because Baucus is simultaneously
"laying down a marker against protectionist Democrats" while "trying
to get the Bush administration to sign off on Democratic policy
proposals with a veneer of soothing rhetoric," and yet is not sure how
to balance these two aims. Were it not for the Bush Administration's
own spotty record on trade, I'd be quite discouraged.
References
1.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB116787470676166607.html?mod=opinion_main_commentaries
2. http://www.danieldrezner.com/archives/003084.html
_______________________________________________
Volokh mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.powerblogs.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/volokh
