Ian Bremmer writes in the International Herald Tribune that the mistrust some in the U.S. have of China when it comes to trade relations is mutual on the other side. Bremmer’s op-ed is interesting, and definitely worth the read.

ManufactureThis argues, however, that the best way to for China to gain the trust of more policy makers here in the U.S., and Americans in general, is for them to keep their word – China should follow the rules it agreed to when it entered the WTO. And, if they don’t follow the rules, they have to know there will be consequences.

Yesterday afternoon, I was interviewed on WVOC Radio the Voice of Columbia — one of the largest talk radio stations in South Carolina. I reminded the host that

South Carolina has lost 91,000 jobs since 2000. I also explained that manufacturing is the largest contributor to the economy and provides good jobs and makes the middle class American dream possible. Afterwards, I urged the candidates to pledge that they would come up with a plan to stop the job losses. Actually I suggested that they pledge to cut the job losses in half nationwide.  

Well it seems that at least one of the candidates was listening. Duncan Hunter not only has read the recently released “Costly Trade with China” report, but he’s making saving manufacturing jobs a major campaign theme. Now if we can get the other 9 on board….

The Republican candidates for president will gather again tonight for a debate, this time in Columbia, S.C., and it will be broadcast live on Fox News. ManufactureThis is wondering once again if the candidates will tell us how they plan to address the challenges facing America’s manufacturing workers and companies, and the economy as a whole.

From international trade practices and currency manipulation to health care and retirement costs, these challenges are chipping away at the foundation of the American economy and the livelihood of American families. And with 91,000 manufacturing jobs lost since 2000 in South Carolina alone, it’s an appropriate place for the candidates to step up and tell us how they plan to tackle these issues.

During the debate at the Reagan Library in California earlier this month, only two of the 10 candidates briefly mentioned some of the challenges facing American manufacturing. Tonight, Americans deserve to hear a vigorous discussion among the candidates about these issues and what they are going to do to protect America’s economic security and position in the global marketplace.

Indiana lost a whopping 17,108 manufacturing jobs in the last 12 months, 2.4% of the state’s manufacturing workforce, according to a new report out by Manufacturers News Inc. It doesn’t take long for the reality of those numbers to settle in, does it?

Predictably, most of Indiana’s job loss came in the automotive industry; 11,174 jobs since last year, attributed to several big plant closings. In fact, Madison County, where major employer Guide Corp. shut down a plant recently, saw industrial employment drop by 40%. How can a community sustain itself when faced with those numbers?

Over much of the last decade, local and state policymakers and business leaders in Indiana have focused their efforts on spurring growth in the high-tech, high paying bio-tech and advanced manufacturing sectors. These efforts might be paying off — pharmaceutical industrial jobs grew by 2.3% in the last year.

But, at the same time federal policymakers have taken relatively few steps to protect American jobs, including not enforcing and strengthening our trade laws. As a result, China and other countries have been allowed to break the rules, manipulate their currency, subsidize whole industries and pay exploitation-level wages.

For every gain a state like Indiana has seen, it’s also faced comparable or larger losses due to factors beyond state and local control. Indiana, which has the nation’s eighth largest manufacturing workforce – nearly 677,000, has lost 14% of its manufacturing jobs (more than 110,000) since 2000.

How many more reports like this one do we have to see before we realize that states like Indiana are facing a very dire future if we leave this trend to continue? How many more good jobs need to be lost?

For most Americans, it’s clear that there is a problem. It’s time policymakers in Washington realize that too.

Bravo to Robert Samuelson in the latest Newsweek for not only calling for stronger efforts to hold China accountable, but also making the case that actions aimed at doing just that aren’t “protectionist.”

“It is not “protectionist” (I am a longstanding free trader) to complain about policies that are predatory; China’s are just that. The logic of free trade is that comparative advantage ultimately benefits everyone. Countries specialize in what they do best. Production and living standards rise. But the logic does not allow for one country’s trade systematically to depress its trading partners’ production and employment. Down that path lies resentment and political backlash.”

And, he appropriately uses the terms “avoidance” and “fester” to describe the inability and unwillingness in recent years to deal with the problem:

“Given the immense stakes—literally the future of the global trading system—the Bush administration has been too timid in pushing China to change. The Treasury Department won’t even declare China guilty of currency manipulation. No doubt doing so would irritate the Chinese. But avoidance is no solution; the longer these problems fester, the more intractable and destructive they will become.”

Well, we wondered if we’d hear the “M” word during last night’s debate, and interestingly, we did hear a few things that made our ears perk up. Two of the candidates talked about the issues facing manufacturing. Their mentions were brief, but it’s definitely a start.

As expected, California Congressman Duncan Hunter was the first to bring up manufacturing, specifically talking about trade policy and taxes when asked what taxes he’d like to cut:

Hunter: “…you know, right now our manufacturers are getting killed. We’re seeing manufacturing move offshore because a dumb trade deal that we signed with the rest of the world allows all of our exports to be taxed twice while their exports to us are not taxed at all. The only way that we can even come close to leveling that playing field is to eliminate manufacturing taxes. So eliminate all taxes on Americans who will stay in the United States and make products and hire American workers.”

To the question of mistakes made by the Bush administration that he wouldn’t repeat, former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee responded with what some would call a populist answer:

Huckabee: “The most important thing a president needs to do is to make it clear that we’re not going to continue to see jobs shipped overseas, jobs that are lost by American workers, many in their 50s who, for 20 and 30 years, have worked to make a company rich, and then watch as a CEO takes a $100 million bonus to jettison those American jobs somewhere else. And the worker not only loses his job, but he loses his pension. That’s criminal. It’s wrong. And if Republicans don’t stop it, we don’t deserve to win in 2008.”

And, then answering how he would be different from the current president, Hunter said:

Hunter: “You know, we won World War II, World War I and the Cold War with a major industrial base. We’re losing our industrial base through bad trade policy right now. China is cheating on trade. I would enforce trade laws. That’s something that the president is not doing.”

It’s going to be a long campaign, and we hope this is just the beginning of a productive discussion on the serious challenges facing American manufacturers and workers. Hopefully in upcoming debates we’ll hear more of the candidates talking about these issues, and they’ll be given more time to tell the American people what they plan to do to address them.

Another week, another debate. As you’ll recall, last week we posted on the fact that not once in the Democratic presidential candidate debate was the word “manufacturing” used, despite the fact that South Carolina, the site of the debate, has lost 91,000 manufacturing jobs since 2000.

Well, this week, we’re on to California, where more than 376,000 manufacturing jobs have been lost (the most of any state in the nation). Will any of the Republican candidates use the “M” word tonight? We hope so, in fact, we’ve publicly called on the candidates to tell us how they plan to address the serious challenges facing American workers and companies.

Additionally, The Politico, which is one of the sponsors of tonight’s debate, is giving voters the chance to submit and vote on questions they’d like to have asked of the candidates tonight. ManufactureThis has submitted a question:

“American manufacturing provides 14 million jobs and generates 80 percent of new patents, but it has challenges: 3 million lost jobs and 40,000 closed facilities, many because of trade with China. Do you have a plan to strengthen manufacturing?”

Click here to get to The Politico’s site, sort the questions by Topic (choose “Trade”), and then look for ManufactureThis.

Hopefully the candidates won’t need prompting from our question to get them to talk such important issues as manufacturing, international trade policy, health care and retirement security for Americans.

Would you believe 1.8 million American jobs? According to a study out today from the Economic Policy Institute - Costly Trade with China - that’s how many American jobs have been displaced by the trade deficit with China since 2001, when China entered the World Trade Organization.

You may think we sound like a broken record when it comes making sure China follows the rules it agreed to when it entered the WTO. But, the facts speak for themselves - 1.8 million jobs. And, those jobs are coming from all sectors (though mostly manufacturing) and all states - from California, which lost nearly 270,000 jobs, to New Hampshire, which lost the equivalent of 2.1% of its total employment (13,000 jobs). And, as the deficit continues to spiral upward, more jobs will be displaced, putting the livelihood of more American families at risk.

The reality is that American workers and companies can’t afford to “wait it out” to see if the promises of China’s WTO entry will ever materialize. The answer is they won’t until China is forced to follow the rules it agreed to.

Our policymakers must re-examine our trade policies and make sure we’re doing all we can to hold China accountable. The jobs we’re losing aren’t just a natural result of globalization, they’re the result of cheating and sidestepping the rules of fair trade.

Many of you may have read Ben Bernanke’s speech on trade today in Butte, Montana.  I have enormous respect for the Chairman of the Federal Reserve Board and for his insights into the economy.  But I’m very disappointed that he fell into three very easy traps for policymakers, journalists, and others trying to frame the trade debate.

First, what’s with the name calling?  Highly-skilled American workers and efficient businesses trying to sell their products – but face: (1) competitors who are unfairly and illegally subsidized through currency manipulation and other means, (2) illegal barriers to selling their goods abroad, or (3) both — are not “economic isolationists.” 

These enterprises are not seeking protection or isolation—they are desperately calling for accountability and being given the same opportunity to compete in the global marketplace. When American manufacturers follow the rules and their competitors don’t, that’s not free trade—it’s trade crime. 

We need to have an honest debate about whether or not current trade rules and globalization are really working to the benefit of America that doesn’t resort to distortions and mischaracterizations. (Perhaps we should start calling Ben Bernanke and his colleagues “soft on trade crime.”) 

Second, when framing the trade debate, it’s important to draw on a variety of sources of information from different perspectives.  One look at the biography and footnotes sections of the Chairman’s speech demonstrates that his mind was already made up. 

There really is a serious academic and economic debate about the costs and benefits of globalization and trade; that debate was not reflected in any way in his speech.  Many distinguished scholars, practitioners, policymakers, and financial and business leaders have raised doubts about some of our current policies.

Third, avoid using overstated estimates, such as those included in the speech on the “consumer effects” of free trade.  We’ve lost more than 3.2 million manufacturing jobs, racked up a $764 billion trade deficit and accumulated a running current account debt that places a dangerous drag on our GDP.  The next generation will bear these enormous costs if we don’t make dramatic changes. 

The very modest “consumer effects” that result from many kinds of illegally dumped imports are more than offset by the loss of income, business activity and profits suffered by domestic manufacturers, according to new research done for AAM that will be released later this month.

Just a quick heads up that the Senate Subcommittee on Commerce, Trade and Tourism has postponed its hearing on “U.S. Trade Relations with China.” We’ll keep you posted on the new date for the hearing.

The report from EPI - “Costly Trade with China” - is still scheduled for release tomorrow. Check back in the morning for more on that report and its findings.