I found the following definitions on the Internet. I do not presume to understand the ins and outs of trade policy, but in simple terms here is my understanding of the various candidates on international trade policies. There are two basic approaches to trade, one is Free Trade and the other is Fair Trade.
Free Trade: “International business not restrained by government interference or regulation, such as duties (1).”
Fair Trade: The first definition is “Trade that conforms to a fair-trade agreement (2).” A second and more in-depth definition is “Fair trade is a trading partnership, based on dialogue, transparency and respect, which seeks greater equity in international trade. It contributes to sustainable development by offering better trading conditions to, and securing the rights of, marginalized producers and workers - especially in the South. Fair trade organizations (backed by consumers) are engaged actively in supporting producers, awareness raising and in campaigning for changes in the rules and practice of conventional international trade (3).”
It seems to me that we have pretty much a “Free Trade” policy in effect here in the USA. Could it be that we have sacrificed jobs and US-based industries for continuous economic growth for cheaper goods to make big business and WalMart successful to fuel the growth? Have the policy makers intentionally and willingly allowed the US to move from a manufacturing base to a service-based economy? Said differently, the cost of cheaper goods to the American consumer (Wal-Mart) is job and industry loss. Why do we not make TVs or other electronic goods, clothes or even pens here?
THE CANDIDATES'S POSITIONS ON TRADE
From reviewing the OnTheIssues.com website and a few of the Presidential candidates’ websites, here is an objective listing of where the various candidates stand in respect to international trade. I include the two most recent presidents for comparison purposes. The number following their names is the economic scale where the candidate fits. used by OnTheIssues.com in to indicate how strongly they favor supporting and expanding free trade. Anyone with a “+” rating favors Free Trade, while those with a “-” tends more to a “Fair Trade” policy.
Free Traders
*** Thompson +10 (not so good)
*** McCain +5
*** Giuliani +5
*** WJ Clinton +5
*** GW Bush +5
*** Romney + 2
Fair Traders
*** Hunter -5 (better)
*** Huckabee -3
*** Paul -3
*** H Clinton -3
*** Obama -3
*** Edwards -3
Clearly, Michigan is among the states that have suffered most under both the WJ Clinton and the GW Bush administrations, which both favored Free Trade. So if you want more of the same vote Romney, McCain, Giuliani or Thompson to insure you continued loss of manufacturing base and good paying jobs.
On the other hand, only one candidate little recognized and little covered by the media, Rep. Duncan Hunter rates the highest in his support for a Fair Trade policy. Listen to what he says about trade, taken from his website, “…America’s one-way-street trade relationship with China and other nations has reduced manufacturing jobs severely in the U.S. I would change the one-way-street into a two-way-street by putting the same charges on foreign goods that they put on ours (4).
TRADE DEFICIT
Hunter, Paul or Huckabee would do much better than any Democrat on dealing with the trade deficit as well as implementing a more favorable policy for America. The Democrats may be more right than wrong on this one particular issue, but they have so much that they have worng this in no way negates their other extreme liberal views.
REFERENCES:
(1) http://www.investorwords.com/2090/free_trade.html
(2) http://www.answers.com/topic/fair-trade?cat=biz-fin
(3) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fair_trade
(4) http://www.gohunter08.com/inner.asp?z=4
I think Duncan Hunter is clearly the best candidate in the field by far. I heard Frank Beckmann interview him on WJR (Detroit, MI radio station) this morning and he explained his plan for improving our trade imbalance. It was really worth hearing. TD.
ReplyDelete