• The Heritage Network
    • Resize:
    • A
    • A
    • A
  • Donate
  • Trade Promotion Authority’s Benefits Depend on the Details

    Legislation to give President Obama Trade Promotion Authority (TPA) was just introduced. TPA gives the President the authority to negotiate trade agreements, which are then presented to Congress for an up-or-down vote.

    When asked whether Congress should enact TPA legislation, Senator Ron Wyden (D–OR), who is likely to assume chairmanship of the Senate Finance Committee, reportedly replied: “It depends on the details.”

    That’s the right answer.

    One option is a TPA bill that clearly empowers the President to negotiate agreements that reduce barriers to international trade and investment while strengthening property rights.

    Another option is a TPA bill that gives these goals low priority while empowering the President to increase trade barriers in order to influence labor, environmental, and currency policies in other countries.

    Until those details are examined, it is impossible to make a recommendation about TPA. In the meantime, it is not unreasonable for supporters of free trade to be skeptical about a request for TPA from a President who believes that the North American Free Trade Agreement “was a mistake”; who delayed trade agreements with Colombia, Panama, and South Korea; and whose Administration has imposed new trade barriers on products ranging from tires to tomatoes.

    However, many attacks on TPA appear to be nothing more than attacks on trade itself, coming from protectionists who want to deprive U.S. families and businesses of the freedom to buy products that are produced in other countries.

    The reliably pro-trade Wall Street Journal recently suggested one approach to TPA:

    Rather than deny fast-track, Republicans can write the Trade Promotion Authority legislation to stipulate that any trade pact must include labor and environmental negotiations that are no more expansive than those contained in the free-trade agreements with Panama, Colombia, Peru and South Korea. Any trade deal that met those terms would get the fast-track treatment. Any pact that exceeded such rules would be subject to amendments and the normal rules of Congressional debate and approval.

    Another concern is that TPA will be used as an ill-advised bargaining chip to extend Trade Adjustment Assistance, a program scheduled to expire at the end of 2014.

    The goal of TPA should be to boost economic freedom. Members of Congress will need to carefully examine the details of new TPA legislation to see if it meets this standard.

    Posted in Economics [slideshow_deploy]

    Comments are closed.

    Comments are subject to approval and moderation. We remind everyone that The Heritage Foundation promotes a civil society where ideas and debate flourish. Please be respectful of each other and the subjects of any criticism. While we may not always agree on policy, we should all agree that being appropriately informed is everyone's intention visiting this site. Profanity, lewdness, personal attacks, and other forms of incivility will not be tolerated. Please keep your thoughts brief and avoid ALL CAPS. While we respect your first amendment rights, we are obligated to our readers to maintain these standards. Thanks for joining the conversation.

    Big Government Is NOT the Answer

    Your tax dollars are being spent on programs that we really don't need.

    I Agree I Disagree ×

    Get Heritage In Your Inbox — FREE!

    Heritage Foundation e-mails keep you updated on the ongoing policy battles in Washington and around the country.