On Monday, January 31st, and Tuesday, February 1st, 2022, WITA hosted its fourth annual Washington International Trade Conference (WITC). This conference brought together leaders in international trade from across the U.S. and around the world to explore the trade landscape and look toward the future of trade.

 Secretary-General Mathias Cormann, Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD)

Moderator: Ambassador Kristen Silverberg, President & COO, Business Roundtable; former U.S. Ambassador to the European Union 

Aik Hoe Lim, Director, Trade and Environment Division, World Trade Organization

Kelly K. Milton, Assistant U.S. Trade Representative, Environment and Natural Resources

Ambassador Gloria Abraham Peralta, Costa Rica’s Permanent Representative to the World Trade Organization, Co-Chair, Trade and Environmental Sustainability Structured Discussions (TESSD), World Trade Organization

Moderator: Sarah Stewart, Executive Director, Silverado Policy Accelerator; former Deputy Assistant U.S. Trade Representative, Environment and Natural Resources

Angela Ellard, Deputy Director General, World Trade Organization

Moderator: Ambassador Rufus Yerxa, former Deputy U.S. Trade Representative; former Deputy Director General of the World Trade Organization

Amy P. Celico, Principal Albright Stonebridge Group | Dentons Global Advisors; former Senior Director for China Affairs, Office of the U.S. Trade Representative

Wendy Cutler, Vice President, Asia Society Policy Institute; former Acting Deputy U.S. Trade Representative

Bonnie Glaser, Director of the Asia Program, German Marshall Fund of the United States

Samm Sacks, Senior Fellow, Paul Tsai China Center & New America, Yale Law School

Moderator: Erin Ennis, Vice President, Global Public Policy, Dell Technologies

Ambassador Kirsten Hillman, Canadian Ambassador to the United States

Ambassador Tomita Koji, Japanese Ambassador to the United States

Ambassador Stavros Lambrinidis, European Union Ambassador to the United States

Moderator: Ambassador Susan Schwab, Strategic Advisor, Mayer Brown LLP; former U.S. Trade Representative

Orit Frenkel, CEO, American Leadership Initiative

Ed Gresser, Vice President and Director for Trade and Global Markets, Progressive Policy Institute (PPI)

Jeffrey Kucik, Associate Professor, School of Government and Public Policy at University of Arizona

Chad Thompson, Executive Director for Legal Affairs & Trade, General Motors

Moderator: Sarah Thorn, Senior Director of Global Government Affairs, Walmart

Jon Gold, Vice President of Supply Chain and Customs Policy, National Retail Federation

Phil Levy, Chief Economist, Flexport

Penny Naas, President of International Public Affairs and Sustainability, UPS

Maria Zieba, Assistant Vice President of International Affairs, National Pork Producers Council

Moderator: Ana Swanson, Correspondent, New York Times

Ambassador Sarah Bianchi, Deputy U.S. Trade Representative

Moderator: Ambassador Robert Holleyman, Partner & President & CEO, Crowell & Moring LLP and C&M International; Former Deputy U.S. Trade Representative

The post 2022 Washington International Trade Conference Recap appeared first on WITA.

On Monday, February 8th, and Tuesday, February 9th, 2021, WITA hosted its third annual Washington International Trade Conference (WITC) for the first time virtually. This conference brought together leaders in both the public and private trade sectors to discuss pressing issues and trends surrounding trade policy. 

The event began with remarks from Kenneth I. Levinson, Executive Director of WITA, as he introduced the first group of panelists: Wendy Cutler, President and Managing Director at the Asia Society Policy Institute, Susan Shirk, Research Professor at the UC San Diego School of Global Policy and Strategy, Aaron L. Friedberg, Professor of Politics & International Affairs at Princeton University, and Ambassador Kurt Tong, Partner at The Asia Group, who shared their thoughts on how trade fits into the overall US-China relationship. 

The U.S. China panel was primarily focused around the overall US-China relationship and how trade fits into the larger picture. From joining the WTO to now, China has significantly increased its dominance in global trade, economic, and financial markets and has now become a credible threat to U.S. hegemony due to large economic pressure.

Looking forward to the Biden administration, the panelists discussed where we are now in our relationship with China, how the Biden review will be conducted, and how trade fits into this multi-faceted relationship. Over the past few months we have seen RCEP signed, the development of the China EU investment deal, and we have now heard talk about China reviving trilateral negotiations with Japan and Korea. The panelists explored the potential impact of the Biden review and present internal focus on China’s growing hegemonic status. 

The Trade & Environmental Sustainability Panel focused on the growing global concern of climate change and how this issue intersects with trade. As the United States has most recently rejoined the Paris Accords and a variety of new executive orders have underpinned the Biden administration’s focus on mitigating climate change, there has been a shift in the international system on the pertinence of this issue. It is important to recognize where the U.S. and its allies now stand on sustainable policies that influence trade and consider how realistic it would be for less developed countries to accommodate the necessary standard to fight climate change. 

The discussion focused on both the EU and New Zealand’s positions on climate change as they relate to trade and what we should center our negotiations on going forward. Although there is promise with the Biden administration on these issues, it is undetermined what the administration’s nationally determined contribution in the Paris agreement will be which will be an important indicator of the level of emissions and leadership role on climate change. The panelists were Amb. Robert Holleyman, Partner at Crowell & Morning LLP, C&M International, Amb. Vangelis Vitalis, New Zealand Ministry of Foreign Affairs & Trade, Madelaine Tuininga, DG Trade Head of Unit in the European Commission, and Himamauli Das, Senior Managing Director at K2 Integrity. 

The next panel centered around finding a way forward on digital trade and delved into the intersection between trade and technology. As more and more countries are considering how they may tax or regulate the space, this issue has become of increasing relevance. As digital tools are a crucial driver of U.S. economic growth, it is clear they present both an incredible opportunity for progress and new challenges. The panelists featured were Arrow Augerot, Director of America’s Public Policy at Amazon, Jason Oxman, President & CEO of the Information Technology Industry Council, Sahra English, Vice President of Public Policy at Mastercard, and Peter Swire, Senior Counsel at Alston & Bird LLP. 

The final panel of the day was the Ambassadors Trade Roundtable with panelists: Amb. Susan Schwab, Mayer Brown LLP, Dame Karen Pierce DCMG, British Ambassador to the USA, Amb. Nestor Forster Brazil’s Ambassador to the USA, Amb. Stavros Lambrinidis EU Ambassador to the USA, and Amb. Arthur Sinodinos Australia’s Ambassador to the USA. The ambassadors shed light on the trade landscape from their perspectives and offered insight into what is important in their countries in dealing with the U.S. and other trading partners. The discussion later touched on the future of the WTO and what each ambassador saw as top priorities for the organization to address.

The second day of WITA’s virtual conference program opened with remarks from Kenneth I. Levinson, Executive Director of WITA and Amb. Alan Wm. Wolff, Deputy Director General of the WTO. Amb. Alan Wolff shared his thoughts on necessary reform and revitalization of the WTO and how its role should evolve. Terence Stewart, author of the blog Current Thoughts on Trade, joined the discussion and gauged Amb. Wolff’s perspective on the WTO’s interest in engaging in more sectoral and regional trade agreements. 

The following panel built off of the previous discussion into a more in-depth conversation about WTO Revitalization & Reform from a broader group of perspectives. Many of the panelists highlighted the importance of improving our relationship with China, getting our dispute settlement system back on track and addressing pertinent 21st century issues such as those involving digital trade and climate change. The panelists featured were Amb. Rufus Yerxa, National Foreign Trade Council, Jennifer Hillman, Council on Foreign Relations, Simon Evenett from the University of St. Gallen, Switzerland, and Hiddo Houben, EU Mission to the WTO.

The next panel centered around the question: “What would a Neo-Progressive Trade Agenda look like?” with panelists from around the world. The panel opened with an introductory discussion of how the WTO has lagged in recognizing the intersection of trade with other issues today and the importance of looking at things in a more wholistic way. Some of the speakers brought up issues related to the environment, gender and labor that requires a new model of trade in order to create shared prosperity and growth. The panelists featured were: Catherine Novelli, Listening For America, Beth Baltzan, American Phoenix Trade Advisory Service, Catherine Feingold AFL-CIO International Department, Katrin Kuhlmann, New Markets Lab, and Kimberley Botwright from the World Economic Forum. 

For the closing keynote and discussion of the conference, WITA was pleased to present Chairman Neal of the House Ways & Means Committee who offered his insight into the contours of trade policy in 2021 and Steve Lamar of the American Apparel & Footwear Association and WITA’s Board President. The Chairman stressed the importance of using trade tools to address many of the issues we face today and the promise of the Biden administration to tackle inequities and reassert U.S. leadership.  

The post 2021 Washington International Trade Conference Recap appeared first on WITA.

Trade Around the World

By: Madelyn Cunningham

The concluding panel of the 2020 Washington International Trade Conference was “Trade Around the World,” a discussion featuring ambassadors H.E. Fitsum Arega, Ambassador of Ethiopia, H.E. Rosemary Banks, Ambassador of New Zealand, H.E. Stavros Lambrinidis, Ambassador of the European Union, and H.E. Ashok Kumar Mirpuri, Ambassador of Singapore. Laura Lane, President of Global Affairs for UPS, moderated the discussion through trade relations and FDI between their countries and the United States and the dissolution of the Appellate Body in the WTO.

Laura Lane opened the panel by discussing the relationship between Singapore and the United States, asking Ambassador Mirpuri to talk about this partnership and possible trade interests of Singapore in the future. Ambassador Mirpuri starts by stating the growing importance of trade in the political sphere, acknowledging that while the audience may have some familiarity with Singapore whether that be through business or the trade relationship with the United States, Singapore is a hyper-globalized country driven by trade.

Trade drives the Singaporean economy, but H.E. Mirpuri brought up the new challenges regarding issues of trade and expressed the need to identify where global trade will be going because of geopolitical conflict, recent anti-globalization and protectionist efforts, and the fourth wave of industrialization. To address these issues and changes, Mirpuri expressed that through the U.S. – Singapore trade relationship, Singapore has shifted its mindset towards future problems and adjusting in this age of digitization and global changes.

Ambassador Mirpuri stressed the need for a rules-based system in the WTO, explaining that for small countries especially, there must be an established system of rules and operations in order for the world dispute settlement process to be fully functioning. To account for the current instability in the WTO and the changing trade atmosphere with digitization, Ambassador Mirpuri identified how Singapore has been adapting.

Mirpuri stated that last month, partnered with New Zealand and Chile, Singapore concluded the Digital Economic Partnership Agreement (DEPA), and hopes agreement will act as a “pathfinder” for e-commerce. Another significant change was the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership (CPTPP), which is currently going through the ratification process.

Moderator Lane then shifted the conversation to bring in New Zealand Ambassador, H.E. Rosemary Banks, asking where she saw the U.S. – New Zealand relationship currently, and the issues on New Zealand’s trade agenda. Ambassador Banks brought up research recently done on the relationship between New Zealand and the United States, which concluded that the first time the country asked for a reciprocal trade agreement with the U.S. was in 1939. She stated that while trade relationships can take a long time, 80 years is a little excessive.

Ambassador Banks then brought up the direction of New Zealand trade policy, she stated that over the last 25 years, there has been significant emphasis on negotiating comprehensive bilateral agreements, establishing relationships with Asian Pacific countries, and maintaining global influence through existing trade agreements. While this has worked in favor of New Zealand, there is worry over taking assumptions of the three-pronged system for granted and the response to encourage the “open-pluralism approach”. Banks called back to Zoellick’s point in his remarks regarding the gap in systems for the process of creating new laws and rules.

Ambassador Banks expressed New Zealand’s excitement to head as the APEC Chair of 2021 in the form of a work program to be established this year, stating that there is a great need for multilateral trade relationships and a functioning and comprehensive dispute settlement system for trade issues. Banks concluded by answering a question asked in Ambassador Zoellick’s session regarding the importance of international trade.

To this, she brought up the “Trade for All Initiative”, a country-wide exercise that involved a consultation to listen to the entire population about their vision for trade policy. Through this consultation, it was found that there is a great divide as to thoughts on current New Zealand trade policy and whether or not it should be shifted in regard to the values of sustainability and equal economic empowerment.

Lane then brought Ambassador of Ethiopia, H.E. Fitsum Arega, into the conversation. With the recent push towards a multilateral trading system and the African Continental Free Trade Agreement (ACFTA), Lane asked how this would tie into a future trade relationship between the United States and Ethiopia.

Ambassador Arega responded with increasing public investment of the Ethiopian government, both social and economic, strengthening the education sector and industrial infrastructure of the country. There is a growing preparation for global trade agreements and relationships in Ethiopia, and Arega identified Africa as the next frontier for business investment and trade because of these changes both domestically and continentally.

In addition to domestic reform, Ambassador Arega stated that the newly elected prime minister, Abiy Ahmed, has made Ethiopian involvement in the World Trade Organization and global trade has a priority in recent years. Arega also identified the vast potential for a United States trade partnership with Ethiopia, as it builds its infrastructure, it has also been building an environmentally sustainable textile market. The African Continental Free Trade Agreement is also a turning point for the continent, Arega explained, allowing for greater opportunities for processing and attractive investment.

Lane turned to H.E. Stavros Lambrinidis, Ambassador of the European Union, she asked whether or not the optimism for a US-EU trade agreement and future policies is warranted. Ambassador Lambrinidis responded that there is good reason to believe in the negotiations of future policy. He stated that when talking about the relationship between the United States and European Union, the benefits of this relationship could demonstrate that free trade can work in a globalized system and not in a way that would isolate certain countries.

Ambassador Lambrinidis identified the single European market as the biggest deregulation experiment in the world, allowing for an open market without borders of the most profitable businesses globally. The key focus of negotiations of a free market should be on the future, and special attention should be placed on the functions of said market from the grassroots of the economy to measure its effectiveness.

Lambrinidis also stated that the success of the single market is also reliant on the European progressive, values-based system; as trade is not only about making money, but about assigning values. GSP+ agreements establish that in order to negotiate and maintain a relationship, countries must also ensure human rights and sustainability practices.

Ambassador Lambrinidis then brought up the need for an established, rules-based system in the WTO and broader world order, as it is not only important to small countries, but also to large markets. Lambrinidis expressed great disdain for unilateral efforts to “destroy” the WTO, and while it is not easy to reverse protectionist and mercantilist policies and economies, he argued that the WTO must become stronger in the face of these issues and enforcing these changes.

With the changing world order comes new standards according to Lambrinidis, and no matter where countries are in their development, he believed there should be no exceptions to the implementation of these standards.

To further this point, Lane asked the panel to expand on their thoughts on the need to strengthen international systems and reforming the dispute settlement system of the WTO into this decade. Ambassador Rosemary Banks started the discussion, she stated that the first challenge of reforming multilateral organizations is having absolute commitment from major players of said organization.

Lane then moved on to special treatment for developing nations, especially as China, while a trade “powerhouse”, still receives exceptions from the WTO due to its first introduction as a developing country. Ambassador Lambrinidis identified this fact as a significant area of the WTO in need of reform as well as transparency and the Appellate Body.

He then stated that the WTO will always be in danger of collapsing as long as countries believe they are powerful enough to perform unilaterally and outside of its systems. He argued that without a neutral referee or party prosiding, dispute settlement will never work multilaterally, no matter how developed a rules-based system may be. China must play a bigger role in demanding rights but also in accepting obligations, and must be on board with future reforms.

Featuring:

H.E. Fitsum Arega, Ambassador of Ethiopia to the United States 

H.E. Rosemary Banks, Ambassador of New Zealand to the United States

H.E. Stavros Lambrinidis, Ambassador of the European Union to the United States

H.E. Ashok Kumar Mirpuri, Ambassador of Singapore to the United States

Laura Lane, moderator, President, Global Public Affairs, UPS

To view more details about the event, visit the event page here.

The post WITC 2020: Trade Around the World – Ambassadors’ Roundtable appeared first on WITA.

Featuring:

Ambassador Robert Zoellick, Senior Fellow, Belfer Center

Ambassador Rufus Yerxa, President, National Foreign Trade Council

To view more details about the event, visit the event page here.

The post WITC 2020: Remarks by Ambassador Robert Zoellick and Conversation with Ambassador Rufus Yerxa appeared first on WITA.

Fireside Chat: “Tarrified” of Trade Talks?

By: Madelyn Cunningham

On February 4th, 2020, the WITC featured a fireside chat from Chad Bown, Senior Fellow at the Peterson Institute for International Economics, and Soumaya Keynes, the Trade and Globalisation Editor for the Economist, hosts of the trade podcast, Trade Talks. Keynes started the discussion by pointing out that trade has been a pressing issue in politics recently, so talks about trade issues and policy have never been more important.

Bown and Keynes introduced the main topic of their session: the dissolution of the appellate body of the World Trade Organization. Keynes started with the current state of the WTO, she stated that the appellate body was no longer functioning and about to be reformed, arguing that the prospects of an actual reform are slim given there are no pressing U.S. cases. By taking a historical perspective on the issue, Keynes and Bown set out to understand the problems of the appellate body.

The 1980’s, according to Bown, was the start of this issue’s prevalence in foreign affairs with the creeping protectionism policies in the form of voluntary export restraints. In the 90’s, the competition with the Japanese auto, steel, and technology industries brought imports coming into the U.S. covered by voluntary export restraints up to 12%. Additionally, many American export interests were not covered by GATT, particularly services and intellectual property rights, combined with a lacking dispute settlement system led to the height of the Section 301 era.

Ultimately, Bown explained, the rest of the world disliked this combination, leading the WTO and the Appellate Body to emerge as the negotiator between the United States and the rest of the world in exchange for GATT coverage of services and IP heavy industries. Keynes added that voluntary export restraints do not entirely disappear, but the 12% of imports declined. The idea was to lower them as they created problems, instead relying on safeguards.

Keynes went on to describe the negative implications of anti-dumping, explaining economists are reluctant to these policies. Bown then added that last week, the Trump administration decided to extend the tariffs placed on steel and aluminum for steel-using companies, known as “cascading protection.” While not that much, when analyzing anti-dumping data, it adds up to $5 billion worth of trade coverage. Keynes summed this point up by stating that the tariffs set in place are influenced more so by internal demand instead of a new anti-competitive practice being set up.

Moving on, Keynes discussed that the new system of the WTO came along with a new expectation for dispute settlement through a more technocratic approach. American negotiators felt there was a certain amount of protection for anti-dumping, but this system was eventually used against the U.S., as other countries accused the United States of over-using this system. Keynes added that more than half of the disputes brought against the U.S. were in regards to its trade remedies.

Bown then switched the conversation to discuss “zeroing”, a method of calculating anti-dumping degrees to find evidence of dumping at a higher margin. During the Uruguay round of negotiation, countries wanted the U.S. to lessen their use of zeroing, and when nothing on the matter was stated, both sides assumed victory. Thus complicating dispute settlement even further. Zeroing cases started flooding into the WTO and became the most litigated issue.

Towards trade remedies, Keynes went over the official USTR complaints about the appellate body was not with the rules, but with how the judges handled said rules, especially with maintaining precedence. This could be attributed to problems with personnel in Geneva, but another diagnosis Keynes mentioned was the disconnect between what they were actually doing versus what dispute settlement meant, as many issues were not litigated in documents, thus complicating negotiations.

When looking at the data for trade remedies, Bown stated that there has been a decline in U.S. use of functions like tariffs, and overall the United States has been more open than ever. Thus, the use of trade remedies in the WTO has possibly been pushed too far, starting the problem with the appellate body. There is a common feeling among countries on the hesitance and problems with the litigation approach of the WTO and the current dispute settlement process.

To conclude, Bown discussed how the issues were put off, while the tactics of the Trump administration are new, the concerns have been apparent. Now, we do not have a functioning appellate body, there are a few mini-deals towards an interim appellate body while the issue is being fixed. However the interim solution may last for longer than previously thought.

Featuring:

Chad Bown, Reginald Jones Senior Fellow, Peterson Institute for International Economics

Soumaya Keynes, Trade & Globalisation Editor, The Economist

To view more details about the event, visit the event page here.

The post WITC 2020: “Tarrified” of Trade Talks? appeared first on WITA.

Trade and the 2020 Elections: The Swing Voter Project

By: Madelyn Cunningham

On February 4th, 2020, WITA hosted Rich Thau as a keynote speaker, as he gave his presentation, “Trade and the 2020 Elections: The Swing Voter Project.” Kimberly Ellis, WITA Board member and Principal of the Monument Policy Group, introduced Thau with his business title, President and Co-Founder of Engagious, and his other project, the Swing Voter Project. By grouping swing voters into two categories: Obama-Trump voters and Romney-Clinton voters, Thau has set out to predict the outcome of swing voting counties in the Upper Midwest.

Thau began by discussing his methodology of picking locations to study, through a color-coded map released by CNBC. The map depicted in dark red the highest rates of swing voting in the 2016 elections from Obama to Trump. Each dark red county was cross-examined by population, and selected if not too sparsely populated.

But why take on this project? According to Thau, there were three reasons. Firstly, in 2016, inconsistent and purely quantitative pollsters did not account for the entire opinion of those they were polling. Thau highlighted the need to not only ask what their opinion was, but also why, prompting his qualitative research design.

Secondly, Thau argued that no one should be shocked by the 2020 election outcome as they were in 2016, especially with the amount of contention in the recent political climate. Lastly, the project should be able to uncover key insights into swing voting habits.

Thau then moved on into his key findings thus far. He found that from the areas he polled, the swing voters were low information voters, receiving most of their news and political information from local broadcastings limited to sports, weather, crime, and traffic, local websites, facebook, national morning TV shows, and “news aggregators” accessible from their device. 

To build on the fact that these are low information voters, Thau asked participants to identify the Democratic candidates for the upcoming 2020 election. He first asked them how confident they were in identifying the Democratic candidates from official photos on a 1 to 10 scale.

In August, Bernie Sanders was the first most identified, at 8.3, followed by Joe Biden, Elizabeth Warren, Kamala Harris, and Beto O’Rourke. Pete Buttigieg was less than 2 and has not shifted since the scale was generated in August. For comparison, Alexandra Ocasio-Cortez, though not a presidential candidate for 2020, was ranked by identification rate in 4th place after Elizabeth Warren. 

In October, Thau was interviewed by Michael Smerconish about the likelihood that Obama-Trump voters would vote for Trump again in the fall. He discussed a hypothetical match-up between Obama and Trump. In each focus group, roughly 2/3rds would choose President Trump. Even though Trump’s campaign promise to bring back manufacturing jobs in the area had not been followed through, these voters were still with the president because of his “America First” agenda.

Compared to the Obama-Trump voters, swing voters that voted Romney then Clinton responded they would vote for Obama in an Obama-Trump match-up.

Thau also found that there was not much “nostalgia” for the Obama-Biden administration among the swing voters. Even participants from Joe Biden’s hometown, Scranton, Pennsylvania, felt no connection to him as a candidate, saying that he was not truly from there to begin with. 

Thau’s third key finding tied into how the state of the economy directly relates to the likelihood of Trump’s reelection, as many voted for him because of his background in business. If the economy turns, support for him would dwindle as he is weak in key issues important to the swing voter demographic. 

In suburban Minneapolis, participants pointed out that he had made “zero effort” to fix the healthcare system. If a democratic candidate were to run on the platform of better, affordable healthcare, this would garner support from swing voters. Trump’s behavior and presence was also analyzed, and while some were supportive, many participants were embarrassed when seeing him on their TV or device. The main dissidents for Trump’s behavior being the Romney-Clinton voters.

As mentioned in his CNN interview with Michael Smerconish, while he did not follow through on the promise to restore manufacturing jobs, his “America First” agenda in foreign policy has won over the swing voters in the Midwest. Relating to foreign affairs, while Trump has been strong with trade policy, the hot button issue for these voters was immigration. While not interchangeable, swing voters view immigration and trade as two issues on “the same ‘America First’ coin.”  

The swing voters do not view trade as a key voting issue, they know more about negotiations with China than they do about the USMCA. In Wilkes-Barre, PA, when asked about whether they knew anyone who personally benefited or was harmed from Trump’s trade policy, there was no response from the focus group.

To encapsulate the swing voters’ knowledge on trade, Thau stated that one response summarized the entire demographic, “we have used so much out of America, and imposing those tariffs will eventually move those jobs back here even though it will cost us more.” 

To further explain the swing voter’s engagement with trade policy, Thau explained that about 3/4ths believe that America’s efforts to secure a fair trade deal with China will be worth the higher prices on imports from other countries. However there is a limit to their tariff support, as if the trade war with China was prolonged and prices were significantly raised, Trump would lose support. All of the swing voters believed that only American Swing Voters beared the cost for tariffs.

Shown a clip of Senator Klobuchar on trade, her approval rating from the Wilkes-Barre focus group increased drastically as soon as she discussed her support for “Made in America” goods. There is a growing mistrust of corporations, but where Senator Warren’s statements about trade are supported by focus groups, their support for her falls when discussing how she will pay for her programs like “Medicare for All” by taking from big corporations. The participants, while in support of the issue, respond that to expect the top income bracket and big corporations to pay for this plan is unachievable.

Moving on to bonus issues, swing voters believe that the weather is getting “weirder” when asked about environmental policy. There is an awareness of climate change, and they are critical of regulatory rollbacks affecting the environment. When asked about the environmental rollbacks, participants in Wilkes-Barre said that they affected the air and water quality and ultimately the health of the community, which could not afford basic healthcare in most cases. There was an overall sense of fear and worry about the state of the environment, and it was more of a key voting issue than healthcare policy.

Participants were also asked to fill in the blank: “Make America _________ Again.” Overwhelmingly, they responded to make America “America” again and “fair.” But there was no consensus as to what they specifically wanted America to be, and Thau argued that this was one of the key problems for Democrats, as while united against Trump, there is no common platform or idea of what they think America should be. 

Thau discussed his findings relating to the impeachment trial of President Trump. The swing voters viewed the trial was just a distraction and demonstration that the Democratic party leaders are out of touch with “regular” Americans. They blame impeachment for the lack of policy and coverage on issues that matter to them.

To conclude his presentation, Thau summarized his key arguments through the various swing voter trends found in his project thus far. He stated that there needs to be attention paid to those who are low information voters, Trump’s “America First” sentiment maintained his support among the demographic, the economy is a determining factor in his reelection, and there was no consensus on what America should be going forward.

To get updates on the findings from Rich Thau’s project, sign up for his newsletter on SwingVoterProject.com.

Kimberly Ellis of the Monument Policy Group joined Rich Thau onstage for a debrief on his presentation. She first asked for Thau’s thoughts on Mike Bloomberg’s prospects in the upcoming race. Thau responded with the fact that in many of the counties he visited, Bloomberg was, for the most part, an unfamiliar candidate.

One of the respondents in Wilkes-Barre pointed out that there was no grass-roots support for Bloomberg, that instead Bloomberg was just a billionaire spending money on his campaign. In contrast, Trump ran on the platform that his campaign was supported from the bottom up, and not just from large personal donations.

In regard to trade policy, Ellis went on to ask whether or not the swing voters supported Trump’s trade policy. Thau stated that they were in absolute support, and that it was not necessarily his specific agreements and policy work, but his messaging of “being on the case”. There is no awareness of the economic effects of his deals, but they are more focused on progress overall.

Featuring:

Rich Thau, President & Co-Founder, Engagious

Kimberly Ellis, Principal, Monument Policy Group

To view more details about the event, visit the event page here.

The post WITC 2020: Trade and the 2020 Elections: The Swing Voter Project appeared first on WITA.

Meet the [Trade] Press, Reporters Roundtable

By: Madelyn Cunningham

On February 4th, 2020, WITA hosted a panel discussion of trade reporters entitled, “Meet the [Trade] Press.” Similar to the press roundtable of the inaugural WITC last year, this panel allowed insight into the opinions of various reporters, from junior correspondents to senior editors. With trade on the forefront of global news, hearing from those who break the latest stories gave the audience a look into trade’s growing importance in the media. 

The reporters featured in the panel were Jenny Leonard, a trade reporter at Bloomberg News, David Lynch, a global economics correspondent at the Washington Post, James Politi, the World Trade Editor of the Financial Times, and Ana Swanson, a trade and economics correspondent at the New York Times. Moderating the discussion was Ambassador Susan Schwab, a strategic advisor at Mayer Brown LLP.

To begin the panel, Ambassador Schwab gave the roundtable context on the recent crisis of dispute settlement within the WTO, specifically on the provision Uruguay Round Agreement Act, that states that every five years, the United States Congress can vote by joint resolution to move the United States out of the WTO. While this matter has not been voted on since 2005, it still holds valuable insight into the political side of trade agreements. Schwab then goes on to ask the panel what they hear about the WTO on the Hill, and whether or not they think a joint resolution to vote will arise in Congress.

Ana Swanson responded by discussing the relevance of the WTO, as not only is there a general argument against its relevance in global politics, but it is more so being used as a political counter against the Trump administration over the need to fix its dispute settlement process. She stated that while there is a growing questioning of the WTO’s relevance, Director-General Roberto Azevêdo seems to be taking these criticisms seriously, and that the recent crises may be worked on in the future at the institutional level.

Moving on to whether or not Congress will take a vote, Swanson concluded that given the high margin of disapproval for the vote in 2005, and the continued non-voting trend throughout the rest of the decade, it would be difficult to pass in Congress.

Ambassador Susan Schwab went on to ask, in relation to the coronavirus and U.S.-China relations as a whole, what the timing prospects were for a Phase Two Deal and so on. David Lynch spoke on the Phase One Deal to introduce his response, as its implementation will most likely delay any further deals to follow it, as the Chinese government would rather first implement Phase One before any additional deals are mediated. Lynch predicted that the Phase Two deal will be something that develops next year, after the 2020 Presidential Election.

Jenny Leonard of Bloomberg News follows up on this point with her opinion as to the contents and timing of the Phase Two Deal, stating that even Phase One would be a win for the Trump administration. Thus, the Phase Two Deal may not necessarily be on the forefront of his trade agenda. 

James Politi argued that even with the trade deals with China, the tariffs will stay, as with the recent unfolding of the coronavirus and its effect on the Chinese economy, the need to implement Phase One has been lifted. Over the long-term however, if these purchases have not been followed through, the administration and the USTR will be put under a lot of pressure in the enforcement of the first deal, setting back Phase Two even further. To conclude, Politi emphasizes that the outcome of the implementation of Phase One and creation of future trade deals with China is still unclear, as is the perception of whether or not these deals were a win for the Trump administration.

The panel was skeptical of the implementation of Phase One before the presidential election later this year, as Trump’s trade promises have been kept and used on his campaign trail. Jenny Leonard followed with the skepticism that while the drafting of Phase Two is still in the air, so is the implementation of Phase One. 

In regard to working with our allies, Schwab asked James Politi about the prospects of the U.S. and the E.U. working together in the future. Politi responded that the trust between the U.S. and the E.U. has been broken down, so having one front against Chinese trade is very unlikely as the E.U. has felt fairly targeted in recent trade policy and tariff implementation. Politi argues that the E.U. would thus take a more “pragmatic” approach, instead of only aligning with the United States in trade policy, they would rather build a trade relationship with China.

David Lynch made the interesting point that the United States no longer shares the same values as the European Union, a statement contrary to popular and academic belief throughout history. He goes on to state that Trump has further diverged from the European Union going as far as to say that the institution is worse than China. 

James Politi follows up on the shift of the European Union, as the trilateral discussions were stalled due to misgivings and an overall lack of trust. He goes on to discuss the greater pressure on member states to enact deals with Trump with its growing isolation from world powers.

Ana Swanson states that while the U.S., Europe, and Japan may have a common interest in addressing unfair economic competition from China, there is also competition among those countries for the China market. Whether through multilateral export control or investment into Chinese services like Huawei, there is a lot of contradiction between this so called “common interest” and the actual actions of those countries.

Ambassador Susan Schwab summarizes the panelists’ prediction for future trade deals with China as a mini-deal being more likely than an actual Phase Two Deal, and even further more so than no deal at all, at least before the election. Schwab claimed that the general deadline for any other deal would be until July 1st, 2021, whether that be a follow up to Phase One, or a mini-deal with tariff proclamation authority.

Moving forward, Ambassador Schwab brings up the UK as a general talking point. James Politi discussed the implications of Brexit, as negotiations were supposed to be underway for a trade deal with the U.S., similar tensions between the U.S. and the E.U. have come up. As negotiations have not been started and there is no set launch date, so similarly to the pane’s prediction for further U.S. China deals, a mini-deal is more likely than one that is more comprehensive. Overall, U.K. trade deals will be “slow-rolling” post-Brexit.

In regard to trade deals from other countries, while the possibility of a trade deal with Japan and Vietnam received no comment, Ana Swanson touched on how a deal with India would most likely be a mini-deal, this deal still being one of the largest deals between the U.S. and India. She goes on to speak more broadly on mini-deals, there is no set motivation for the administration to return to more comprehensive trade deals, as not only is it a more streamlined process in avoiding a Congressional vote, but it makes no difference to the American public.

To get at trade policy and politics, Ambassador Schwab asked the panel to elaborate on trends of U.S. trade politics and the legacy of the Trump administration’s trade policy as it stands today. Jenny Leonard begins by claiming that “bashing” China works in favor of the administration and will be present in all administrations to come, no matter the party. 

David Lynch follows up on this by claiming the president “blew up” conversations that were previously sterile, this has resulted in a shake up of the current system. He claimed that these deals were made for President Trump to use in his campaign, but there will be various costs to this approach, such as irritating allies, economic inefficiency due to company cost, but they will eventually even out.

Ana Swanson then discusses the difference of the trade agenda a couple months ago versus today, with the December tariffs on China about to come into effect, an unclear timeline of trade deals like the USMCA and Phase One, however these issues were resolved within the past months. This difference in the trade climate has been translated into political victories, possibly even having long-lasting positive political implications. Swanson also brought up the point that the USMCA was a bipartisan effort, as the trade agreement brought in elements of the democratic and labor union platform.

Swanson questioned whether or not a Democratic president would be able to reach the populist Republicans to form a trade coalition in the future, but overall trade policy is shifting into a different, more bipartisan direction.

To conclude the discussion, Ambassador Schwab asked the panel where they individually got their news, especially in their interactions with various political institutions. While panelists said the various news sources represented in the room, interestingly enough twitter has also become a big outlet for news in recent years.

Featuring:

Jenny Leonard, Trade Reporter, Bloomberg News

David Lynch, Global Economics Correspondent, Washington Post

James Politi, World Trade Editor, Financial Times

Ana Swanson, Trade and Economics Correspondent, New York Times

Ambassador Susan Schwab, moderator, Strategic Advisor, Mayer Brown LLP

To view more details about the event, visit the event page here.

The post WITC 2020: Meet the [Trade] Press appeared first on WITA.

Featuring:

Susan Lund, Director of Research, McKinsey Global Institute

Julia Nielson, Head of the Development Division, Trade & Agriculture Directorate, OECD

Paul Triolo, Practice Head, Geo-Technology, Eurasia Group

Jake Colvin, moderator, Executive Director, Global Innovation Forum

To view more details about the event, visit the event page here.

The post WITC 2020: NextGenTrade®: Digitization and the Future of Disruption – How New Technologies are Shaping Global Trade appeared first on WITA.

Featuring:

Wendy Cutler, Vice President, Asia Society Policy Institute

Professor Ann Lee, Author, “What the US Can Learn from China” and “Will China’s Economy Collapse?”

Ambassador Kurt Tong, Partner, The Asia Group

Clete Willems, Partner, Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld LLP

Douglas M. Bell, moderator, Global Trade Policy Leader, Ernst & Young

To view more details about the event, visit the event page here.

The post WITC 2020: The Future of U.S. China Trade and Relations appeared first on WITA.

Featuring:

Andrew Gelfuso, Vice President, Trade Center Management Associates

Kenneth Levinson, Executive Director, Washington International Trade Association

 Director-General Roberto Azevêdo, World Trade Organization

Ambassador Rufus Yerxa, President, National Foreign Trade Council

To view more details about the event, visit the event page here.

The post WITC 2020: Keynote Address from WTO Director-General, Roberto Azevêdo and Conversation with Ambassador Rufus Yerxa appeared first on WITA.