Skip to main content
Support
Article

In Public Perceptions and Congress, a Disconnect on Trade?

Linda Killian

"Fifty-nine percent of liberal Democrats and 62 percent of independents believe previous free-trade agreements have been good for the U.S., compared with just 50 percent of conservative Republicans. But you wouldn’t know that by studying the House, where more than 150 Democrats have announced opposition to TPP as well as presidential “fast track” authority for future trade deals. Republican opposition to the trade deal casts further doubt about its future," writes Linda Killian.

Just before it recessed last month the Senate approved “fast track” trade authority that would help conclude the Trans-Pacific Partnership deal that’s been the subject of much debate and media coverage. The legislation is expected to be considered by the House this month.

But a recent Pew Research Poll shows that uncertainty about trade deals’ benefits for American workers spans party and ideological lines.

Fifty-nine percent of liberal Democrats and 62% of independents believe previous free-trade agreements have been good for the U.S., compared with just 50% of conservative Republicans. But you wouldn’t know that by studying the House, where more than 150 Democrats have announced opposition to TPP as well as presidential “fast track” authority for future trade deals.

Republican opposition to the trade deal casts further doubt about its future.

According to the Pew survey, adults 30 and younger and Hispanics are the most positive about free-trade agreements, with about 70% of both groups believing they are good for this country.

But just 43% of Americans think they have personally benefited as a result of trade deals, while 36% believe they have been hurt by them.

Overall, 58% of Americans believe that free trade, on balance, is good for the U.S., 10 points higher than in 2010, according to Pew. But the share who believe that trade agreements lead to lower U.S. wages has remained at 46%, close to the amount who believe trade agreements lead to job losses in this country.

In 2000, there were about 11 million manufacturing jobs in the U.S.; the number was down to about 8 million last year. But the cause and effect of trade deals and the decline in U.S. manufacturing isn’t simple or straightforward.

Trade deals can provide access to overseas markets and be a boost to U.S. businesses. But for Americans who have seen factories close in their communities and who have lost their jobs to cheaper overseas labor, that message may be of little comfort.

Public perceptions on both ends of the ideological spectrum that previous trade deals have not been good for U.S. manufacturing and the middle class will not make passage of the trade deal easier in the House.

Rather than simply touting the benefits of free trade, proponents of this deal might have a better chance of success if they talked more about other nations’ unfair labor and trade practices and how this deal would address such things, and combined its consideration with measures to counter the decline in U.S. manufacturing, including tax incentives for U.S. corporations to create and keep jobs in this country.
 

The opinions expressed here are solely those of the author.

This article was originally published in The Wall Street Journal

About the Author

Linda Killian

Linda Killian

Former Senior Scholar;
Author and Journalist
Read More