Jewish World Review Feb. 25, 2004 / 3 Adar 5764
It's back to the Dark Ages on trade
It is Feb. 24 2005, and President John Kerry and his economic team Roger Altman and Alan Blinder from the U.S. Treasury and U.S. trade representative Clyde Prestowitz are busy converting the U.S. into a protectionist fortress.
- The North American Free Trade Agreement? Rewrite it to force Mexican wages upward.
- The World Trade Organization? Reconsider.
- Japan? Ralph Nader, special envoy, is just landing in Tokyo.
- And oh, that meeting with Pascal Lamy, the European Union's trade commissioner? Schedule it later.
This vision of a return to the Dark Ages of protectionism seems improbable, especially considering the sunny American scenario of just a few weeks ago. No protectionist presidential candidate cast his shadow across the election stage Ross Perot and Patrick Buchanan were nowhere to be seen. The only two serious candidates who talked about protectionism were Dick Gephardt (D-Mo.) and former Vermont Gov. Howard Dean. And Iowa voters chucked them out early, a humiliation that seemed to underscore the anachronistic nature of the protectionist message.
In short, Americans generally seemed to have internalized the principal economic lesson of the 1990s: that the sort of global commerce symbolized by NAFTA is a good thing. Certainly, the U.S. transition to an international service economy has been difficult. Many citizens have lost jobs or know people who have. It is infuriating to see Morgan Stanley and JP Morgan thinking about hiring in Mumbai, formerly Bombay, when people are worrying about the death of manufacturing in Montgomery, Ala.
Nonetheless, most voters also know that U.S. unemployment dipped to historic lows in the decade following the signing of NAFTA; they know that even now, post-recession, unemployment is lower than the average of the past quarter-century. Finally, Americans know that more jobs will materialize eventually. For while outsourcing may "kill" some jobs, it also helps companies generate more profits, and those profits are reinvested eventually in jobs.
But something is changing to obscure this logic. This month Kerry and Sen. John Edwards (D-N.C.) have discovered that the loss of manufacturing jobs is unnerving voters and that calling for "job protection" precise meaning to be worked out later has enormous appeal.
Suddenly, the basic laws of economics no longer seem to apply. And without considering much the implications of their actions, the candidates are edging toward old anti-trade positions. Thus earlier this month, Edwards told an audience in Wisconsin that trade deals such as NAFTA were bad as they "drive down our wages and ship our jobs around the world." He also spoke repeatedly about "fair trade not free trade."
Kerry has been more circumspect; he, after all, supported NAFTA in the Senate, as well as China's entry to the WTO. And his economic guru, Blinder, spent his career repeating the formula, "increasing productivity and trade equals growth and jobs." Nonetheless, Kerry has also as James Hoffa of the Teamsters union recently put it "evolved" on trade. NAFTA, Kerry says, has to be reopened and rewritten. The Kerry campaign has also reminded voters that its agenda calls for a moratorium on new trade agreements until all old agreements are reviewed, and Kerry has said he wants to "bring back" jobs. What can that mean?
The Republicans have also done their part to put back the clock. This month saw a new low for the party, when Dennis Hastert, the House speaker, made the inquisitorial demand that Greg Mankiw, chairman of the White House Council of Economic Advisers, deny his suggestion that outsourcing can increase American well-being.
Hastert, a wonderful man but, after all, a former wrestling coach, was forcing Mankiw, author of one of the best economic textbooks, to deny a basic law of economics. ("Recant, Galileo, admit that outsourcing always kills jobs!")
It is easy to argue that this retrograde shift doesn't matter. Bill Clinton also asked for NAFTA riders during his first presidential campaign. But by crusading so hard for American jobs, today's candidates are suggesting the problem is free markets. They thus make it virtually inevitable that they will have to deliver protectionism after the election even in areas where they do not intend such an outcome.
This spells trouble. Democrats these days generally like to portray themselves as multilateralist. But protectionism is inherently unilateralist. If you are interested in international co-operation at all, you can see that this is exactly the wrong moment to bash international trade.
The second problem is that by "protecting" jobs, the new administration is likely to kill them. Kerry's international tax plan will force companies to stay in the U.S. at the expense of profitability. This in turn will force them to lay off workers. His scapegoating of "Benedict Arnold chief executives" certainly won't inspire new companies to list on U.S. exchanges. As for Kerry's domestic tax increases, they represent the one kind of step that ensures lost jobs will not return: they reduce U.S. relative competitiveness.
The third problem is subtler: intellectual dishonesty. Congressmen of the 1990s saw first-hand what trade can do for growth. By ignoring that experience, Edwards and Kerry and Hastert even force Americans to ignore it along with them. In effect, these men are erasing history. You can't get more medieval than that.
Every weekday JewishWorldReview.com publishes what many in Washington
and in the media consider "must reading." Sign up for the daily JWR update. It's free. Just click here.
JWR contributor Amity Shlaes is a columnist for Financial Times
. Her latest book is
The Greedy Hand: How Taxes Drive Americans Crazy and What to Do About It. Send your comments by clicking here.
02/20/04: Trust the U.S. or trust Al Qaeda
02/12/04: A Political Year of Yalies: Boola Boola for Meritocracy
02/04/04: Here's what America doesn't need: Another New Deal
01/15/04: Forget Mars, U.S. economy looking like the final frontier
12/30/03: Bob Bartley put morality's place in the market economy
12/18/03: Mission accomplished: 1991's, that is
12/11/03: Shrugging off outdated data: Inside America's economic machine
11/13/03: Leaving a little something for the kids? Good luck
11/05/03: Never, Never will we Desist
09/30/03: Tax, lies and a few supply-side parables
10/09/03: Free markets are the key to rebuilding Iraq
09/25/03: Don't be sentimental, Mr. Bush
08/12/02: Howard Dean, Robin Hood
05/29/02: Berlin Diarist: To believe that by self-improvement and restraint, we can end tyranny
03/27/02: The curse of oil
11/12/02: Political Correctness at the Fed (No joke!)
10/31/02: Local enforcer who has changed national laws
10/12/02: No Mirror for Europe; US is a picture of unity
08/14/02: Keeping your financial eggs at home
07/24/02: New Democrats' unaffordable luxury
06/26/02: The evolution of eminent domain is the story of the lasting power of Supreme Court decisions to alter the American cultural fabric
06/20/02: The distinction between known risk and uncertainty: What was lost in the Martha Stewart flap
06/11/02: Europe, long waiting for a chance to assert itself as independent from the US on the world stage, is clueless to terror's threat
06/04/02: A Cold Warrior's lessons for the Middle East
05/21/02: Geography does matter when it comes to development, but aid must nonetheless be linked to good governance
05/14/02: The increasing number of new claims is hurting innocent companies and making a mockery of the Common Law system
05/09/02: Aid, development and guilt in our times of terror
04/30/02: Wine lovers may at last be able to stray across state borders. The Internet is coming to the aide of free trade
04/23/02: Taxation by way of Madison Avenue
04/17/02: Special relationships and free trade do not mix
04/08/02: Is terror the flip side of globalization?
03/20/02 Bush gives aid but seeks results
03/13/02 The Danger in policy by numbers
02/26/02: States' smokescreen for tax hypocrisy
02/20/02: Echoes of leadership against a global threat
02/13/02: Jackson Vanik May be a Useful Analogy When Thinking About the Middle East
02/07/02: Budgeting for victory: Requiem for a peace dividend
02/05/02: The detectives of 1930s pulp fiction had a nose for clients bearing gifts. Sadly, those consulted by Enron did not
01/22/02: Allow all American children a decent chance
01/15/02: Do not disturb the profit-sharing revolution
01/09/02: It is dangerous to elevate a currency as a political emblem if the need for other economic reforms is obscured
01/03/02: There is only one way for a free thinker to bring up children
12/20/01: Why America's economy always bounces back
12/18/01: When it comes to taxes, Washington lawmakers can learn a thing or two from The Honeymooners
12/13/01: Bush opens a new era
12/12/01: A flamboyant reversal for the Democratic party
12/06/01: Threat of an oil embargo on the U.S. is a bluff
11/29/01: Which is more important--the war or diplomatic comity?
11/20/01: Unbalanced by a wealth of oil and diamonds
10/17/01: Afghanistan Needs a General MacArthur
09/27/01: The US has gained an understanding of the costs of war for which its European allies have hitherto wished in vain
09/13/01: War against terrorism will rise from the ashes
08/15/01: Geography is no excuse for the state's economic stagnation. Its policymakers should take a leaf from Ireland's book
08/07/01: Teamsters may pay a heavy price for winning its batle in Congress
07/25/01: Towards a patent-free nirvana?
07/17/01: History proves the lasting value of tax cuts
07/10/01: Stem cell research has awakened a bitter debate in Washington but voters care more about other electoral issues
07/03/01: America foots the bill for Europe's largesse
06/26/01: America the litigious, land of the lawyer's fee
06/20/01: Five reasons for gloom about global growth
06/18/01: Show pity for Alice in Tax Wonderland
06/13/01: America must take a French lesson in trade
06/11/01: Time to dream the impossible dream for Iraq
06/07/01: Whatever happened to simple?
06/04/01: When the relationship between companies becomes as close as a marriage, the eventual break-up is often very painful
06/01/01: Loving and hating the Bush tax bill
05/30/01: Will Grisham soon be unemployed? In America's courts these days, there's no room left over for legal fiction
05/22/01: Republicans sample the rhetoric of confidence
05/16/01: Boeing has been promised $60m to site its headquarters in Illinois. The deal looks a poor one for taxpayers
05/14/01: Adam Smith in love
05/09/01: Those rotten Russian capitalists
05/07/01: Why tax havens provide shelter for everyone
05/04/01: Middle classes pay for get-the-rich folly
05/01/01: Money can't buy happiness? Think again.
04/26/01: Calling America's rogues and entrepreneurs
04/19/01: High earners right to feel lonely at the top
04/11/01: The right must learn the comfort of strangers
04/04/01: When domestic law arrives by the back door
03/30/01: A Lexus tax cut suits the jalopy driver
03/27/01: The unchallenged dominance of King Dollar
03/20/01: Natural selection of an intellectual aristocracy
03/16/01: The hidden danger of a regulatory recession
03/14/01: Is the American condition that boring? Why so many Oscar nominated movies aren't set in America
03/07/01: Trampling on the theory of path dependence
03/05/01: Fighting the good fight
03/01/01: It is time for Fannie and Freddie to grow up
02/27/01: IT's important
02/22/01: The guilty conscience of America's millionaires
02/14/01: The benefits of helping the 'rich'
02/09/01: The Danger and Promise of the Bush Schools Plan
02/05/01: Crack and Compassion
01/31/01: Debt is good
01/24/01: A gloomy end for a half-hearted undertaking
01/17/01: The challenge of an ally with its own mind
01/15/01: An unexpected American family portrait
01/10/01: A fitting legacy for America's beloved dictator
01/08/01: The trick of tax 'convenience'
01/03/01: Time to stop blaming Greenspan over taxes
12/11/00: So smart they're dumb
12/06/00: How economic bad news came good for Bush
12/04/00: The Boies factor
11/30/00: "The inevitable demands for recounts erupted like acne…"
11/28/00: Fair play and the rules of the electoral game
11/23/00: The shining prospect beyond a cloudy election
11/21/00: Try the Cleveland model
11/16/00: A surprising winner emerges in the US election
11/09/00: Those powerful expats
What's right for America versus what works
11/02/00: Time to turn off big government's autopilot
10/30/00: Canada beating America in financial sensibility
10/26/00: When progressiveness leads to backwardness
10/24/00: The most accurate poll
10/19/00: The Middle East tells us the hawks were right
10/17/00: The split personalities of America's super rich
10/10/00: 'Equity Rights' or Wake up and Smell the Starbucks
10/04/00: Trapped in the basement of global capitalism
09/21/00: The final act of a grand presidential tragedy
09/21/00: Europeans strike back at the fuel tax monster. Should Americans follow?
09/18/00: First steps to success
09/13/00: America rejects the human rights transplant
09/07/00: Minimum wage, maximum cost
09/05/00: Prudent Al Gore plans some serious spending
08/31/00: A revolution fails to bring power to the people
08/28/00: A reali$tic poll
08/21/00: "I Goofed"
08/16/00: Part of the union, but not part of the party
08/09/00: Silicon Alley Secrets
08/02/00: Radical Republicans warm up for Philadelphia
07/31/00: I'll Cry if I Want To
07/27/00: Cold warrior of the new world
07/25/00: The Estate Tax will drop dead
07/18/00: Shooting down the anti-missile defence myths
07/14/00: A convenient punchbag for America's leaders
07/07/00: How to destroy the pharmaceutical industry
07/05/00: Patriots and bleeding hearts
06/30/00: Candidates beware: New Washington consensus on robust growth stands the old wisdom on its head
06/28/00: White America's flight to educational quality
06/26/00: How Hillary inspired the feminist infobabes
© 2003, Financial Times