> Are the Democrats Truly More Protectionist?

[Econbrowser] More broadly, one will have to ask whether the Administration and Congress that brought us the steel safeguard, the Ag bill, and softwood lumber countervailing and anti-dumping duties (CVDs and ADs, respectively) is actually less protectionist that the Administration and Congress that passed Nafta and WTO. And await to see if the Congress extend trade promotion authority and the renewal of the Information Technology Agreement.

Previous [Previous] The Battle For Ground Zero, Part 192...

Next [Next] The Oversea Investors and China’s Exports...

Some related posts from Technorati and Google.

Dominican Republic News & Travel Information Service  Dominican Republic News & Travel Information Service: the 29 participants that negotiated the ITA during WTO's First Ministerial Conference in Singapore in December 1996, membership has now risen to 68 that account for more than 97% of world trade in IT products. For more information on the ITA, see (via Cosmos)

[] International Economic Law and Policy Blog: A Farewell to Zeroing: Even a recent NAFTA Chapter 19 panel (Softwood Lumber) invalidated this practice, invoking the celebrated Charming Betsy doctrine and thus viewing that the U.S. should follow the AB decision in Softwood Lumber. (Softwood Lumber Products from Canada, No.

[] The Canadian Blog Exchange - Canada-US Relations::Softwood Lumber: Harper was so anxious to get the softwood lumber deal in place by this weekend that he was going to use $1 billion of Canadian taxpayers' money to pay off the Americans.It was part of this money that was going to create the $450 million slush fund for the White House.The Globe reports that the deal is going to be delayed because about 20 per cent of the businesses covered by the deal - 86 out of 400 - refused to sign over their duty refunds to the government, and refused to drop their lawsuits.A[] - Public Policy Weblog » Playing Leapfrog with a Unicorn?: Canada’s handling of the MMT dispute during the mid-1990s, and its continued manipulation of its sizeable Technology Partnership Program to subsidize Bombardier and other firms in competition with the national subsidies of other countries, suggest that Canadian politicians and civil servants are as flexible in their interpretation of trade laws as necessary to promote their perceptions of domestic economic interests (or to engage in the politics of clientelism). Nor does the track record of many Canadian politicians in smearing, bullying, or stonewalling their opponents when their power is challenged suggest that they have any claims to teach similar groups in other countries much when it comes to civility or virtue.

Reflected tags on Technorati: Blog, ,