Expressing strong support for the U.S.-Colombia Trade Promotion Agreement, the Chamber's Bruce Josten said yesterday:

"For the sake of American workers and farmers, we must move forward on the Colombia trade agreement.  Congress and the administration must redouble their efforts to find a way to secure approval. A more robust trade adjustment assistance program can win bipartisan support while garnering the backing of both organized labor and the business community.  Agreement on trade adjustment assistance can help secure Congressional approval of the agreement with Colombia, which will also bring real benefits for American workers and farmers. It will also provide a helping hand to our closest ally in South America. The stakes are too high to simply walk away from this agreement."

Today the Washington Post’s Robert Samuelson has a column faulting economic isolationists for blaming trade for every economic ill, especially a decline in manufacturing. Samuelson explains:

...the opposite is now true: Only through expanded trade can the economy thrive and manufacturing stage a comeback.

The latest evidence of the gap between political rhetoric and economic reality is the Democratic-controlled House's decision to set aside, indefinitely, the free-trade agreement negotiated with Colombia by the Bush administration. On economic grounds, there's no reason to reject the agreement. Colombia's exports already enter the U.S. market duty-free under the 1991 Andean Trade Preference Act. Meanwhile, many U.S. exports to Colombia face stiff tariffs -- up to 35 percent on autos, 15 percent on tractors and 10 percent on computers -- most of which would ultimately go to zero under the agreement.

The tariffs dampen demand for U.S. exports by raising their price and putting them at a competitive disadvantage. Whirlpool annually exports about $50 million worth of refrigerators, washer-dryers and dishwashers to Colombia from plants in Ohio, Arkansas and Iowa. On a $1,000 refrigerator, a 20 percent tariff raises the retail price $200 in a fiercely competitive market with appliances also supplied by local firms and imports from Korea and elsewhere. (Why does Colombia want the agreement? Answer: Congress has to renew Colombia's present duty-free status periodically. The agreement would make it permanent.)
...
Yet, it's politically convenient to oppose the trade agreement because the popular imagery is that trade destroys U.S. jobs. The loss of almost 4 million U.S. manufacturing jobs since 1998 seems easy to explain by cheap imports or the flight of plants to Mexico, China and other poorer countries. The truth is murkier: Although this has occurred, job losses also stem from greater efficiency (fewer workers producing more goods) and slumping domestic demand (for communications equipment and computers after the dot-com bust and for housing materials and vehicles now). Nor has falling factory employment crippled overall U.S. job creation.
...
It is no longer necessary to rely on elegant theories of comparative advantage, more consumer choice or greater competition to favor open trade. Jobs and economic growth will suffice. Indeed, without export-led growth, the economy may face a sluggish future.