GOP Protectionists

The Wall Street Journal ^ | March 5, 2007 | Jack Kemp

[MinorityRepublican]

As the GOP stumbles around Washington trying to be the party of Herbert Hoover, it's sad to see so many Republicans drifting so far and so fast from the Reagan model that helped pave the way for the great, non-inflationary economic and jobs expansion of the past 25 years.

Sen. Lindsey Graham, (R., S.C.) threatens China with a 28% tariff for daring to tie the yuan to the dollar. Rep. Tom Tancredo, running for president, is miffed at President Bush for trying to design comprehensive immigration-reform legislation. The president wants a guest-worker program that could help alleviate border problems in the Southwest.

But Mr. Tancredo is a sissy compared to my old pal Duncan Hunter, the congressman from San Diego. He's also running in the GOP primaries as an unambiguous Hoover-like protectionist and anti-globalization candidate. Then there's my other old friend Pat Buchanan, railing against Japan and Toyota for having the chutzpah to sell so many cars in the U.S., even going so far as to build manufacturing plants right here under our noses.

Mr. Buchanan resigned from the GOP a few years ago because Republicans weren't tough enough on trade, tariffs and immigration for his so-called "economic nationalism" model. His answer to the competition faced by U.S. automakers from abroad is to bash Japan, and to accuse those of us who believe in classical free-trade policies of being "fanatics" who cause U.S. manufacturing to move offshore. Adam Smith and David Ricardo are spinning in their graves!

In the interest of full disclosure, I'm on the advisory board of Toyota North America and now drive a hybrid Lexus. But I also believe that the real answer for U.S. auto companies is a decrease in tax rates, lower costs of labor and greater flexibility in future union contracts.

[c-b 1]

The president wants a guest-worker program that could help alleviate border problems in the Southwest.

Hey Jack in case you don't remember we tried that 20 years ago.

Insanity is doing the same thing over, and over, expecting different results.

[spikeytx86]

1. China's currency is severely undervalued and is intentionally manipulated. If they are so devoted to free traded how come they are not pushing china to allow their currency to free float?

2. Toyota makes great cars and that is why they have such high market share, I agree with them on that. However, Japan puts up major major trade barriers to our goods especially auto exports, Why does the WSJ not lecture them on Free Trade?

3. Other countries like India have high tariffs on our goods and services and tremendous non-tarrif trade barriers to our exports.

We are a free trade nation in a protectionist world. The problem is not here my friends, it is abroad. It is insane to practice Free Trade when no one else is. I will be all for free trade when the rest of the world removes their barriers from our exports. I am sick of being lectured by the ivory tower while they ignore the blatant protectionist and nationalist policies our trading partners erect. It is time for the WSJ to stop lecturing us and tell the world "Tear down your trade walls!".

[SoCalPol]

Bill Gertz of the Washington Times who knows more about what is doing with China than almost anyone

Also Laura Ingraham have both been on the same page with Duncan Hunter who is correct.

If China wins, Jack's policy means squat.

[Reagan Man]

Sounds like Jack Kemp is ranging off the conservative reservation. Lets look at a few historic facts.

Ronald Reagan believed in free trade, as long as it was fair trade. And while Reagan wasn't a protectionist per se, many economists considered his administration to be the most protectionist since Herbert Hoover. Reagan signed off on special trade protection for Harley-Davidson, imposed quotas on steel imports, pressured Japan to restrict vehicle shipments to the United States, tightened limits on foreign textiles, accepted new barriers to imported sugar, raised duties on Canadian shakes and shingles. All in the name of fair trade. In 1980 Reagan campaigned on creating a free trade agreement with Canada and Mexico. Later that Reagan idea became NAFTA. Reagan supported NAFTA. Whether NAFTA has been as successful as Reagan had originally envisioned, is debatable. One thing is certain. Reagan wasn't a globalist like Bush41 was and Bush43 is today.

Here are two radio speeches Reagan gave to the nation on the issues of free and fair trade.

Radio Address to the Nation on Free and Fair Trade September 7th, 1985

Radio Address to the Nation on Free and Fair Trade April 25th, 1987

"We hope that through these negotiations we will be able to convince our trading partners to stop their unfair trading practices and open those markets that are now closed to American exports. We will take countermeasures only as a last resort, but our trading partners should not doubt our determination to see international trade conducted fairly with the same rules applicable to all. I'm committed to and will continue to fight for fair trade. American exporters and American workers deserve a fair shake abroad, and we intend to see they get it. Our objective will always be to make world trading partnerships freer and fairer for all."
--- President Ronald Reagan

[HANG THE EXPENSE]

Free trade? riiiight! Sure seems to me that the U.S. keeps getting screwed with china.

[Danae]

But I also believe that the real answer for U.S. auto companies is a decrease in tax rates, lower costs of labor and greater flexibility in future union contracts.

Yea, GREAT idea, let every other nation tarrif our goods 15% to nearly 800%, yea that will make us competitive! Use the Trade practices of our trading "Partners" on THEM. Tarrif Indian goods 800%. Tarrif Chinese goods at what ever the hell the percentage works out to be with the Yuan pegged to the dollar - %. Let's see how long it takes them to change their tune. What do you want to bet that it will be a WHOLE lot faster than letting them ROB US BLIND!!!!!!!!!!

[LoneRangerMassachusetts]

Rep. Tom Tancredo, running for president, is miffed at President Bush for trying to design comprehensive immigration-reform legislation. The president wants a guest-worker program that could help alleviate border problems in the Southwest.

Kemp is a corporate hack. He sits on the boards of corporations who see cheap labor as the goal to competition. Never mind the loss in tax revenue, the added burden of charitable services, and the social problems of disease and crime. The corporate hacks live in nice clean gated communities away from middle class that is not growing in wealth as fast as costs rise. My health insurance will go up 35 percent this year but not my income. Screw the statistics that they spout. The elites wealth may be growing fast, but I don't see it in my well off middle-class community.

The big economic problem with illegals is they make labor so cheap that businesses choose to hire them over investing in technology to make better paid Americans more productive. That is going to screw America in the long run. We will lose the ability to innovate. Kemp can take the WSJ and wipe his fat corporate A$$ with it.

[gas0linealley]

In the interest of full disclosure, I'm on the advisory board of Toyota North America and now drive a hybrid Lexus. But I also believe that the real answer for U.S. auto companies is a decrease in tax rates, lower costs of labor and greater flexibility in future union contracts.

Poor Toyota...US automakers get Jack's advice for free, Toyota has to pay for it.

It couldn't be a case of "you get what you pay for", could it?

[SoCalPol]

More ways than one

[LurkingSince1943]

Jack is simply fondling the center, something he learned in his football days.

He wasn't too good at it there, either.

Little Timmy Russert and Jack Kemp are a couple of Buffalo butt boys, pun intended.

[HisKingdomWillAbolishSinDeath]

Jack spends all his time in private jets, palatial estates, and corporate board rooms. Now there is a guy who can relate.

[Brilliant]

"Mr. Tancredo is a sissy compared to my old pal Duncan Hunter, the congressman from San Diego. He's also running in the GOP primaries as an unambiguous Hoover-like protectionist and anti-globalization candidate."



Duncan Hunter would have my vote but for the fact that he seems so fixated on protectionism. He should stick to border control.

[wolfcreek]

"but for the fact that he seems so fixated on protectionism."


I heard his speech at CPAC......it was entirely directed at the ChiComs.


Is it true the Chinese have bought up a large portion of the US debt?

[AuntB]

Duncan Hunter would have my vote but for the fact that he seems so fixated on protectionism.

The word 'protectionism' is being perverted to suit political purposes just as the term 'immigrant'and 'guest worker' has been. This nation isn't a business and it's people are not a commodity, no matter how much the globalists of the world work toward that end.

[AuntB]

Jack Kemp. VERY cozy with the open border/globalist crowd.

Newt Gingrich along with Grover Norquist, Tamar Jacoby, JACK KEMP, the usual open border people wrote a letter published in the Wall St. Journal proclaiming the only solution was Bush's guest worker program. And don't forget there was not one word in the Contract w/America about immigration.

http://www.nfap.net/pressreleases/Feb6_2004_pr.aspx


The Wall Street Journal

February 6, 2004

Welcome to America

Fifteen authors offer this "Conservative Statement of Principles on Immigration":

In his farewell address to the nation, President Reagan said: "I've spoken of the Shining City all my political life . . . [I]n my mind it was . . . teeming with people of all kinds living in harmony and peace, a city with free ports that hummed with commerce and creativity. And if there had to be city walls, the walls had doors and the doors were open to anyone with the will and heart to get here."

America is a nation of immigrants. Except for Native American Indians, everyone in this country came to America or is here due to the good fortune that a parent, grandparent, or other relation came before them. Keeping a door open to those with the "will and heart to get here" is vital to our economy, our culture, our role in the world, and our historic tradition as a land of freedom and opportunity.

Conservatives believe in legal immigration. We believe that America grows stronger by welcoming those who seek to better their families, work in our industries, and find liberty and refuge from oppression.

Conservatives oppose illegal immigration. We believe there is a right way and a wrong way to immigrate to the U.S. However, as conservatives we believe that our laws must reflect reality and common sense, be fiscally responsible, and avoid the loss of innocent life. Our current immigration laws do not pass this test.

Between 1990 and 2000, the U.S. increased the number of Border Patrol Agents from 3,600 to 10,000. During that same period illegal immigration rose by 5.5 million. Moreover, over the past eight years, more than 2,000 men, women, and children have died attempting to cross into America and seek the opportunity to work and achieve a better life. The status quo is unacceptable and clinging to the status quo -- or tougher versions of it -- is neither conservative nor principled. It has become clear that the only viable approach to reform is combining enforcement with additional legal avenues for those who wish to work in our economy, while also addressing the situation of those already here in the U.S.

President Bush has proposed a new legal path to work in the U.S. through a temporary worker program that will match willing workers with willing employers. We applaud the president and believe his approach holds great promise to reduce illegal immigration and establish a humane, orderly, and economically sensible approach to migration that will aid homeland security and free up border-security assets to focus on genuine threats. The president has shown courage by calling on Congress to place reality over rhetoric and recognize that those already working here outside the law are unlikely to leave. Congress can fulfill its role by establishing sufficient increases in legal immigration and paths to permanent residence to enable more workers to stay, assimilate, and become part of America.

Immigrants are crucial to our competitiveness and future labor and economic growth, as well as our military strength. Our country's welcoming attitude to immigrants will permit the U.S. to grow and prosper, as the populations of many other nations stagnate and decline. Each generation of Americans must connect our nation's past to its future and in so doing keep President Reagan's vision of the "Shining City" alive.

Co-authored by Stuart Anderson, Jeff Bell, Linda Chavez, Larry Cirignano, Cesar V. Conda, Francis Fukuyama, Richard Gilder, Newt Gingrich, Ed Goeas, Tamar Jacoby, Jack Kemp, Steve Moore, Grover Norquist, Richard W. Rahn and Malcolm Wallop.





Lots more here:
http://towncriernews.blogspot.com/2007/02/newt-gingrich-conservative-not-on.html

[logician2u]

Duncan Hunter would have my vote but for the fact that he seems so fixated on protectionism. He should stick to border control.

Two sides of the same coin.

[JHBowden]

Kudos to Jack Kemp for being the voice of reason.

[snowsislander]

2. Toyota makes great cars and that is why they have such high market share, I agree with them on that. However, Japan puts up major major trade barriers to our goods especially auto exports, Why does the WSJ not lecture them on Free Trade?

Could you humor me and tell me exactly what barriers are being imposed? There are plenty of European cars on the roads of Japan; are these barriers not being raised for the Europeans?

I watched GM's miserable attempt at selling American cars in Japan a few years ago, and I believe that certainly in that case it was simply a matter of very bad marketing.

Why do companies such as Coca-cola and products such as Campbell's Soup sell perfectly well in Japan? Do they somehow magically leap these "barriers"?

I think it is because they actually try to cater to the Japanese customer base rather than simply trying to replicate U.S. sales campaigns.

For instance, pull-tops on soup cans were common in Japan long before they were here, and Campbell's went right along with that design in the Japanese market well before pull-top cans were offered here in the U.S. Had they simply just tried to sell U.S. soup in U.S.-style cans, I think the market reach would have only been to the expatriate community in Japan shopping in expat supermarkets. But by marketing to the Japanese customer base, they are able to penetrate far more of the natural market.

[zerosix]

Note to Mr. Kemp,

You lost the Vice Presidency because you were too much of a sissy to take on Algore in a debate.

Go back to wherever you choose to live, enjoy your pension without thanking the Americans who are arranging for you to have lifetime private government healthcare as well as a cushy pension and leave the issues of who we desire to serve as our choice in the GOP to we, the electorate.

Signed,

A Pis@#d off Conservative