Trading Favors

http://nytimes.com/2003/12/02/opinion/02TUE1.html

December 2, 2003
Trading Favors

Presidents subordinate economic and trade policy to electoral pandering at
their own peril. That should now be abundantly clear to George Bush as he
tries to decide what to do - and when to announce it - in response to a
World Trade Organization ruling that his 2002 steel tariffs were illegal.

Yesterday, Mr. Bush starred in a campaign fund-raiser in Michigan held by
steel-dependent auto executives and other industrial leaders who have
complained bitterly about the tariffs. Today, he will collect $1 million or
so in Pittsburgh at a fund-raiser held by the chief executive of a steel
maker. There is no way Mr. Bush can say anything on steel that will please
both audiences.

Despite the opposition of its own economic team, the White House adopted the
tariffs to protect America's ailing industry and woo steelworkers' votes in
the key electoral battlegrounds of West Virginia, Pennsylvania and Ohio. The
move, based on the specious claim that a sudden surge of imported steel was
responsible for the domestic industry's woes, harmed the overall economy and
antagonized the nation's trading partners.

Some of these nations are threatening to impose retaliatory tariffs on an
array of American products by mid-December if Washington does not lift its
ill-advised taxes on imported steel. The White House is reported to be ready
to throw in the towel, and will probably claim victory by noting that there
has been some restructuring of the industry. American steel makers have also
been helped by surging demand from China and the weakening dollar.

A recent move to restrict textile imports from China shows that the Bush
administration is still eager to dabble in protectionism to seek political
gain, but a retreat on steel tariffs would help avoid an escalation in
global trade tensions.

Of course, the retreat could not be announced before today's fund-raiser in
Pittsburgh, where even the football heroes are Steelers. Steel companies
warn that lifting the tariffs would amount to a "broken promise" that could
cost Mr. Bush dearly. Rank-and-file steelworkers might sound equally
disappointed if their union had not already endorsed Richard Gephardt's
presidential candidacy.

Which brings us back to the central point. President Bush should stop trying
to fine-tune trade policy to enhance his electoral vote count and focus on
the overall national interest. Both he and the country will be a lot better
off when he does.



Copyright 2003 The New York Times Company

--
--
FAIR USE NOTICE: This post contains copyrighted material the use of which
has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. I am
making such material available in an effort to advance understanding of
environmental, political, human rights, economic, democracy, scientific, and
social justice issues, etc. I believe this constitutes a 'fair use' of any
such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright
Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107

"If this were a dictatorship, it'd be a heck of a lot easier, just so
long as I'm the dictator." - GW Bush 12/18/2000.

"To announce that there must be no criticism of the president, or that
we are to stand by the president right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic
and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public."
---Theodore Roosevelt

"I think all foreigners should stop interfering in the internal affairs of
Iraq."
-- Deputy Defense Secretary Paul Wolfowitz,