Description

Debate over America's engagement in the global economy has been
oversimplified into a battle between isolationists and free
traders, whereas the ultimate struggle is between those who support
a truly free market and those who favor government intervention,
such as tariffs, subsidies, and bailouts, in the international
marketplace.
Protection and subsidies alike deny Americans the freedom to
spend and invest their resources as they choose. They diminish our
national wealth by diverting resources to less productive but
politically favored sectors of the economy. Subsidies undermine
support for an open economy by tainting the cause of free trade as
just another favor for big business.
An examination of congressional votes on trade and subsidies
shows that members of the 105th Congress can be classified into
four categories: free traders, who support trade and oppose
subsidies; internationalists, who support both trade and subsidies;
isolationists, who oppose both trade and subsidies; and
interventionists, who oppose trade and support subsidies.
Only 25 members of the House and 12 of the Senate fit the
category of free traders, voting more than half the time in
opposition to both trade restrictions and international economic
subsidies. House members who voted the most consistently for free
trade were Philip Crane (R-Ill.), Tom Campbell (R-Calif.), J. D.
Hayworth (R-Ariz.), Mark Sanford (R-S.C.), and John Shadegg
(R-Ariz.). In the Senate, Wayne Allard (R-Colo.) compiled the best
free-trade voting record.
In the House, 106 members, or 25 percent, voted as
internationalists; 49, or 11 percent, voted as isolationists; and
249, a majority of 58 percent, voted as interventionists. In the
Senate, 55 voted as internationalists, 14 as isolationists, and 19
as interventionists.
Members elected since 1992 were slightly less inclined to
support free trade than were more veteran lawmakers but were more
inclined to oppose subsidies. Republicans in the House were twice
as likely as Democrats to oppose import barriers and subsidies.
Members of Congress do not need to choose between the
isolationism of Pat Buchanan and the internationalism of President
Clinton. They can choose to vote for a coherent agenda to
liberalize trade and eliminate subsidies.