Democrats and trade

Democrats in Washington, D.C., are arguing among themselves about trade: whether to pile new qualifications and restrictions on it, or not. We believe that it is in the interest of the country, and particularly of this state, which has the highest foreign trade per capita of any state, that efforts continue to open markets and lower barriers to commerce.

Younger Democrats like Rep. Adam Smith, D-Tacoma, seem to get that, at least most of the time. Smith wants to pass a new trade-promotion authority bill next summer, as do we, because without authority to negotiate a non-amendable agreement, unfettered trade will end.

Smith and some others want to add more measures protective of labor and the environment. He would have trade agreements include core labor standards recognized by the International Labor Organization in Geneva: the right of workers to organize, no official discrimination against unions, no forced labor and no child labor. These are standard rules of a modern economy, and acceptable to legitimate business.

Going much beyond this invites trouble, because it becomes imperious, and a means by which a rich country can hobble competitors. It is similar with the environment: If we push too far, we start managing the other country's affairs.

A moderate push in this direction under a Democratic Congress is acceptable. What concerns us is the feeling among many Democrats (and some Republicans) that trade agreements hurt American workers. We think that, overall, this is not so.

Americans have more jobs than they have ever had and they own more things than they have ever had — a stock of stuff to which they are joyfully adding this holiday season. Looking at places around the world where life is good and wages high, we see that all of them are in trade, and most of them are good at it.

It is the particular job of Washington state's Democrats to educate their colleagues about this. This is a high-trade state and a high-wage state — a correlation that is no accident. This region has chosen to seek foreign customers, and we have been successful.

If other Democrats start slandering Bill Clinton and his treasury secretary, Robert Rubin, as too deferential to trade, our Democrats need to defend them. As Smith has said, on matters of economics, most of the time Clinton and Rubin were right.