The American Spectator

home
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT
The Largest Selection of Liberal-baiting Merchandise on the Net!
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT
Political Hay
Print Email

Political Hay

The Sovereignty Canard

(Page 2 of 2)

But what of taxes imposed by international bodies? The transnational panels that adjudicate trade disputes under NAFTA and the WTO cannot impose taxes -- period. These panels have no power of enforcement apart from the governmental powers of the agreeing nations. Moreover, the "penalties" announced by trade panels authorize nothing beyond an action by the prevailing nation that it might have taken unilaterally, at any time, for any reason.

For example: Nation A brings an action against Nation B, alleging that Nation B's new agricultural law introduces an exceptional subsidy to unprocessed corn exports. After listening to evidence provided by both nations, the panel decides that Nation B's new subsidy exceeds the baseline in the trade agreement. It determines that the Nation B's new subsidy costs domestic corn producers in Nation A annual sales of $30 million.

The panel rules: Nation A can now impose $30 million in tariffs against products of nation B, to compensate for its loss.

But in fact, Nation A could have imposed a retaliatory tariff of $30 million -- or more -- on day one of the dispute. It is a sovereign nation, with absolute control over its ports of entry. No "tax" has been imposed on nation B. Substantively, the panel has delayed a trade war between sovereign powers that want to trade, encouraging them to negotiate their disagreement in advance of a "final ruling."

Theorists like Phyllis Schlafly and Pat Buchanan wish to protect American workers and American industry from foreign competition. By stigmatizing trade agreements as unconstitutional, or as damaging to American sovereignty, they avoid a series of embarrassing questions regarding their position. For instance: one half of American imports are used not by consumers, but by fabricators, who maintain the competitive position of American products abroad by their freedom to purchase the world's most cost-effective inputs. How will import restrictions help them?

Exports support six million American employees, including 20 percent of the total U.S. manufacturing workforce. Forty percent of American manufacturing jobs in computers and electronics are export related, as are 30 percent in machinery fabrication. How will trade wars help these workers, these businesses?

Capital insourcing -- direct investment of foreign-based corporations on American soil, such as the Asian auto plants in our South -- account for 5 million American jobs. How will attempts to restrict capital flows affect this workforce?

Stated simply: How can Schlafly, Buchanan, et al. protect American workers or American capitalists from competition in internationally traded goods and services?

A commitment to protect when one will not is treachery; an offer to protect when one cannot is foolery. Americans should concentrate on policies that will make our labor more productive and our capital more competitive, rather than upon futile attempts to protect both.

Finally, constitutional Sturm und Drang over trade deflects conservatives' attention from actual threats to our sovereignty. Ambassador John Bolton and Deputy Assistant Attorney General John Yoo recently argued that pending international conventions go beyond the rules of international trade and finance embodied in Breton Woods, GATT and NAFTA. Agreements like the Law of the Sea Treaty compromise the ability of the United States to gather and protect military intelligence. Agreements like the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child attempt, however toothlessly, to undermine the individual rights guaranteed to Americans under our Constitution.

Patriots from Alexander Hamilton to Ed Meese have clearly articulated both the importance of international agreements, and the subordination of such agreements to the instrument under which they are created. International panels, lawfully instituted, play an important role in our freedom of commerce. But when international arbitrators assume the posture of independent lawmakers, the Congress and the president should exercise what the Constitution guarantees: U.S. sovereignty.

Page:   12

Letter to the Editor

topics:
Trade

Richard Nadler is president of the Americas Majority Foundation, a Midwestern public policy think tank.

Comments

Sue| 6.1.09 @ 1:12PM

May Mr. Nadler rest in peace. My condolences to his family.

Vern Crisler| 6.1.09 @ 3:34PM

An excellent discussion of trade from the late Richard Nadler. Libertarian conceptions of pure free trade only work in a fantasy world. In the real world, trade has to be negotiated between nations, because national interest is often of more importance than self-interest. We may not like that, but it's the way the world works.

Trade agreements and tribunals are the best method for settling disputes, outside of armed conflict.

bobc| 6.2.09 @ 12:06AM

I have to agree with Phyllis Schlafly and Pat Buchanan. We should never have to rely on foreign countries for our clothing, electronics, tires, or whatever....over 3 million manufacturing jobs have been lost here.

One cannot purchase anything if they do not have a job!

Building a "service economy" won't help us much, as most of those jobs are low wages.

I prefer to see our manufacturing base rise up again!

SM | 6.2.09 @ 12:50AM

Since Nadler did not even believe that America had the right to control its own borders against illegal immigration, this concern over trade treaties seems a little peculiar.

Gerard Jackson| 6.2.09 @ 1:34AM

Schlafly and Pat Buchanan do not understand the theory of free trade. However, it needs to be understood that free trade theory was formulated within the framework of a gold standard. In other words, outcomes based on genuine comparative advantage require a sound monetary policy. By distorting prices Inflationary policies also distort the pattern of international trade with the result that an industry may find its comparative advantage has been destroyed by a loose monetary policy. Unfortunately the vast majority of economists are unaware of this phenomenon. Hence their belief that America's pattern of trade is always determined by the law of comparative advantage.

Marc Birnbaum| 6.2.09 @ 10:51AM

Richard would occasionally come to my Orthodox synagogue for daily prayers and we would have short talks. Both of us shared a conservative outlook. He was always friendly. A few days ago, surprised to see him after a prolonged period, I asked what he'd been up to. He said, jokingly, "You can look it up on the Internet." Richard, I'll miss you. R.I.P.

Felix| 6.2.09 @ 7:18PM

There are many distortions of natural market forces that overwhelm the benefits of free trade. One of them is the manipulation of the worldwide commodity of oil by OPEC. 90% of the worlds oil is now controlled by governments. OPEC helped trigger the recession we are currently experiencing by limiting supply and driving up the price of oil. Our own government also limits the supply of oil by over-regulation. Another already mentioned is the manipulation of currencies. Another is that after being a closed economy for centuries, China threw open the floodgates putting over a billion people on the worldwide labor market over a period of a few years. Yes it took some time to develop a critical mass of manufacturing know-how, but the shock to the worldwide economy is great. This would not have happened had China been a free and open economy from the beginning of the industrial revolution.

Supra Shoes| 11.18.09 @ 12:58AM

Supra Shoes
Supra Skytop Shoes

Leave a Comment

Related Articles

ADVERTISEMENT

Why Does Alyssa Milano Hate Me?

Robert Stacy McCain

* * * *

In Sum, IPCC Discredited

Paul Chesser

* * * *

That Dangerous Radical . . . Marvin Olasky?

Robert Stacy McCain

* * * *

Forget the Committees

Greg Scandlen

* * * *

Moment of Truth

W. James Antle, III

* * * *

No Sales Days in the Afghan War

George H. Wittman

* * * *

Bureaucrats With Badges

Mark Hyman

* * * *

Obama in Wonderland

Ken Blackwell

* * * *

A Writer Speaks

William Tucker

* * * *

What Has Changed?

Robert P. Kirchhoefer

* * * *

High Stakes

Manon McKinnon

* * * *
ADVERTISEMENT