The world cheered when President Barack Obama took the oath of office
- many hopeful that this young leader would emerge as a guiding light for the global economic crisis and restore America's
reputation as a wise and generous neighbor. President Obama warned that we are in the greatest financial crisis since the
Great Depression and offered up a nearly $800 billion economic stimulus package to create jobs, support states and protect
the country's future. At the same time, President Obama urged lawmakers combing through proposed investments that "we can't
send a protectionist message."
What happened?
Tucked inside the nearly 700-page stimulus text is a short clause that
sounds at face value as cheerful as vanilla ice cream on warm apple pie. It's called "Buy American" and it provides that all
iron, steel and manufactured goods used in stimulus-funded projects be produced in America.
As Senator Sherrod Brown, a Democrat from Ohio put it to the New York Times:
"Who could be against it? Well, some Ivy League economists don't like it - something about Smoot-Hawley and the Great Depression."
Perhaps too much time has passed since the financial crisis of the 1930s
or our lawmakers are not reading their history books. The "Buy American" provisions are dangerous protectionist policies thinly
guised as feel-good patriotism. Politicians know that with American jobs being lost they must be seen as doing something to
put people back to work. But history teaches us that policies designed to prop up a country's economy and its industries tends
to backfire. Countries rush to save themselves, stop trading with one another, and endanger the global system.
The "Buy American" provisions will signal to our trading partners around
the world that the United States is returning to the bad old
days of protectionism and economic nationalism. Rather than stimulate the American economy, these provisions will lead to
retaliation from abroad and cost precious jobs in the United States.
The Peterson Institute for International Economics, a nonpartisan
think tank, estimated that a few thousand jobs would be created by "Buy American" whereas as many as 65,000 jobs could be
lost if other countries put similar laws in place. [Bipartisan doesn’t
mean anything concern tariffs since both parties follow the neoliberal pipers--jk.]
The United States'
global economic leadership is not a guaranteed thing. It is something we build and maintain every day with our ideas, our
products and our longstanding policy of international engagement. That leadership has paid huge dividends for Americans, contributing
to an increase of 25 million jobs in the United States between
1993 and 2006 - a period that coincided with an unprecedented expansion of U.S.
trade policy.
"Buy American" is poised to unravel much of that trade policy, putting
at risk previous trade agreements and violating other concessions made to our trading partners. That lawmakers say that the
provisions are consistent with the letter of World Trade Organization rules is meaningless if the effect of "Buy American"
is to turn our country inward and halt trading opportunities.
If we reverse ourselves on trade now, the negative impact will be felt
across the globe. We don't have to speculate about this. We know what happens when the United
States makes a conscious step toward protectionism, ratcheting up tariffs and closing its
borders to the outside world.
The Smoot-Hawley Tariff Act of 1930 helped precipitate a decade-long
economic downturn[i]. In our increasingly global economy, the effects of such a move today may
well be even more disastrous. Both established markets like ours and fragile emerging markets in the developing world now
depend on the free flow of goods and services. If we shut off that flow, we'll hurt ourselves, abandon the developing world
and irreparably damage the global leadership we've fought so hard to establish.
Trade is not to blame for our economic crisis. Indeed, continuing our
global leadership on trade may pave the clearest path back to prosperity, not just for our nation but for the world at large.
Our new leaders in Congress in the White House must reject the inevitable protectionist propaganda and do what they know to
be right for our country.
Gary
Shapiro is the president and CEO of the Consumer Electronics Association, which represents more than 2,200 U.S. technology companies. Consumer electronics is 95% manufactured overseas; therefore protectionist
tariffs would reduce his association members’ ability to import electronics.
[i] This is bull shit, because
foreign trade in 1929 was under 10% of our GDP. A
reduction of it through rising tariffs would not major force bringing on the great depression.
Rather it was falling wages through the 20’s. Reduced buying power
coupled with a credit bubble that burst was the principle cause. GDP
already fell before the act. Roosevelt didn’t take
office until 1933, the act was passed in 1930. Moreover the depression ended
in 1937 with high tariffs in place. For an account of that period http://skeptically.org/crash/id27.html.