Markets, old and new

Though the House Wednesday supported improved trade status for China, a prime reason for there being a debate at all on this issue is found in the recent history of similar legislation. More specifically, NAFTA’s failed side agreements on workers’ rights and the environment and the failed programs that the White House pledged to create in order to protect U.S. workers as a result of Nafta have made many dubious that any sort of fair deal is possible for the average person.

Whichever side members of Congress take in the debate over China (the Senate is expected to vote in June), the discussion provides an ideal time to rescue these important protections.

Rep. John Baldacci, who opposed permanent normal trade relations with China, is nonetheless right in emphasizing the need to revisit such Nafta provisions as Transitional Adjustment Assistance Program, which is both underfunded and under-advertised. It was supposed to hold workers harmless in the event of layoffs caused by Nafta. Though unemployment is low in most parts of the country, including Maine, the loss of manufacturing jobs and the rise of lower paying service jobs shows an abundance of harm that the TAA program has been unable to check.

Congress is fully aware of this problem, particularly in the Northeast, based on a series of reports by the Department of Housing and Urban Development. Called “Now is the Time,” these reports detail problems and opportunities within areas identified in President Clinton’s New Market Initiative — places that have been left behind during the economic boom. The HUD report describes states that have experienced population loss, pockets of high unemployment and “job losses in the high-wage manufacturing sector between 1980 and 1990.” Sounds like Maine from here. The initiative is designed to spur private investment in these places through low interest loans with government guarantees and tax credits.

Some money for these programs have been passed, but it is not nearly enough, according to Rep. Baldacci, and several programs still have yet to be authorized. No one should not be satisfied with this. The message is simple: The White House and Congress should spend as much energy helping workers caught in economic conditions caused by government as they have helping the workers’ employers expand to other countries.