Campaigning and governing are very different and we will have to wait and see if his campaign rhetoric translates into a policy program on trade protection. As Dominic Meagehr compared Bush’s early stance towards China with the baggage Obama brings on China, it is useful to remind ourselves what Bill Clinton campaigned for, when it came to trade, back in 1992.
Bill Clinton was against giving China most favoured nation status and campaigned against NAFTA. His position changed of course after he was elected*.
Obama said he wants to review NAFTA? Bill Clinton at first opposed the Bush administration’s version, wanting to put environmental and labour standard provisions into the agreement. Ultimately Bill Clinton passed the original Bush version. Sure, there were constraints on Clinton (Congress) but promises on the campaign trail do not always translate ino policy action.
Bill Clinton gave China considerable heartburn as he campaigned to link trade to human rights . He told the Chinese
If you want to continue most-favored-nation status for your government-owned industries as well as your private ones, observe human rights in the future, open your society…
Clinton backed away from that as well.
We’ll have to wait and see with Obama but so far the signs from his economics team during the campaign and Austan Goolsbee’s highly publicised reassurance to the Canadians on NAFTA are good for trade. This was a reminder of how silly it can get during campaign season: Goolsbee, nearly had his head handed to him for ‘committing truth’in a private conversation with Canadian officials about NAFTA. Obama has often emphasises re-training workers, beefing up the trade adjustment measures and keeping America competitive in an increasingly globalised world with investment in education and infrastrucutre. That seems the right way to go.
*h/t: David Brady of the Hoover Institution
Obama will have his hands totally full dealing with the economic crisis for the first few months if not his entire first term. One could argue that some of the policies he will take are protectionist, especially with regard to the automobile industry, but the intention will not be protectionist as much as it will be a part of a broader effort to stabilize the economy. The world trading system would not be protected if the U.S. auto manufacturers were to collapse, bringing down with them additional financial institutions and engendering a huge jump n U.S. Federal indebtedness.
Clinton was explicitly pro-NAFTA in the 1992 presidential campaign. I can remember my relief when he made his announcement. He did want to add protections to it, but mainly he was seen as pro-trade in contrast to people like Gephardt. On balance, his administration was far more effective pushing a free trade agenda than the current Bush Administration has been, rhetoric notwithstanding.