Kantor's Cant: The Hole in Our Trade Policy
Trade Representative Mickey Kantor's tough talk may have won concessions abroad. But the administration has failed to conquer the greatest threat to open trade: protectionist sentiment at home.
Marc Levinson writes about economics for Newsweek.
Brash, hard-nosed, quick-tempered. When Los Angeles lawyer Mickey Kantor became U.S. trade representative in 1993, those adjectives fit him like a well-tailored suit. They were a sign that things would be different in the antebellum building that houses the trade representative's small staff. Bill Clinton had made trade a major issue in his 1992 presidential campaign, and the belief that other countries were getting the best of the United States ran deep in the new administration. Kantor, who had been Clinton's national campaign chair, was given the highly sensitive job of making sure America got a fair shake in world trade.
By most measures Kantor's tenure has been a resounding success. The Clinton administration has not produced a similar record of achievement in any other field, foreign or domestic. On Kantor's watch two major accords to reduce tariffs and trade barriers have come to fruition, the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) and the 112-nation pact creating the World Trade Organization (WTO). The Clinton-inspired Summit of the Americas in 1994 set a course for a future free trade pact covering the entire western hemisphere, and the administration helped persuade the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation forum to adopt free trade as its goal for the coming decade. In tense negotiations on a host of difficult bilateral issues, Kantor's confrontational tactics have wrung concessions from trading partners and earned Clinton political points at home.
This is a premium article
You must be a logged in Foreign Affairs subscriber to continue reading. If you wish to continue reading this article please subscribe , or activate your online account to get full online access.
Log In
Buy PDF
Buy a premium PDF reprint of this article.Related
California is the most populous state in the United States. Its gross economic product is seventh in the world, well ahead of China or Canada. Given its massive size and the fact that the export-driven sector is the only part of its economy that shows any potential for long-term growth, California is increasingly adopting its own foreign policy. In turn international economic trends are having strong regional effects from San Diego to San Francisco. At the center of this new interdependence lies the North American Free Trade Agreement and the pivotal bilateral tie between Mexico and California.
Although privatization zealots backed by Wall Street have called for replacing Social Security with mandatory investment in stocks and bonds, their promised high rates of return do not accord with experience. Any form of private investment is much riskier than a government program, and in the end can be more expensive if the government must bail it out. For at least a generation, retirement taxes would rise, funneling money to private investors. With small adjustments, the current pay-as-you-go system can continue its historic success.
Though it pointedly describes the great American slowdown that has taken place since 1973, The End of Affluence lashes out at the cure: technology, downsizing, and trade.

Sign-up for free weekly updates from ForeignAffairs.com.