Obama Protectionism Analysis
As the last two sections have shown, contrary to popular takes on both the Obama Presidency and US trade politics, Obama’s inducing of protectionist measures into his trade policy does not constitute an overall breaking of the mould in US trade politics, rather it is merely a sustenance of the US executive succumbing to longstanding protectionist pressures domestically. In consideration of not only how protectionism is not a new development within US trade politics but also that Obama has been bound by the same domestic pressures as his predecessors, it may be considered surprising that Obama has been ascribed with a protectionist label that his predecessors often escaped. This consequently provides a new political puzzle that needs to be addressed
…show more content…
This is because it has been a common theme amongst US Presidents to ostensibly declare their commitment to free and open trade. A good example of this comes from Truman’s 1950 State of the Union Address, in which he argued that “World prosperity requires that we do all we can to expand world trade… The GATT is an effort to prevent the kind of anarchy and irresponsibility in world trade which did so much to bring about the world depression of the 1930's” (Truman, 1950). Over a quarter of a century later Reagan echoed this sentiment, stating that "Our trade policy rests firmly on the foundation of free and open markets. History has taught us that the freer the flow of world trade, the stronger the tides of human progress and peace among nations" (Reagan, Misus Institute, 1988). Of course, such a message on trade is not limited to Reagan and Truman but rather has been continuously delivered by US executives since the end of the Second World War. Notable examples include Kennedy’s ‘Benefits of Increased Trade’ Speech to Congress in 1962 (Kennedy, 1962) and Bush’s argument that ‘the more markets we open, the more competitive America becomes’ (Bush, 2006). Whilst it would be possible to go through each former President and highlight their harbouring of free trade, the above examples are sufficient in demonstrating the timeless and bipartisan nature of the rhetorical commitment to free trade on behalf of US
This is because it has been a common theme amongst US Presidents to ostensibly declare their commitment to free and open trade. A good example of this comes from Truman’s 1950 State of the Union Address, in which he argued that “World prosperity requires that we do all we can to expand world trade… The GATT is an effort to prevent the kind of anarchy and irresponsibility in world trade which did so much to bring about the world depression of the 1930's” (Truman, 1950). Over a quarter of a century later Reagan echoed this sentiment, stating that "Our trade policy rests firmly on the foundation of free and open markets. History has taught us that the freer the flow of world trade, the stronger the tides of human progress and peace among nations" (Reagan, Misus Institute, 1988). Of course, such a message on trade is not limited to Reagan and Truman but rather has been continuously delivered by US executives since the end of the Second World War. Notable examples include Kennedy’s ‘Benefits of Increased Trade’ Speech to Congress in 1962 (Kennedy, 1962) and Bush’s argument that ‘the more markets we open, the more competitive America becomes’ (Bush, 2006). Whilst it would be possible to go through each former President and highlight their harbouring of free trade, the above examples are sufficient in demonstrating the timeless and bipartisan nature of the rhetorical commitment to free trade on behalf of US