Pardon My Politics
Politics From The Left, The Right & Somewhere in BetweenIs Insourcing Coming Back to the US?
OK, now I am impressed. Senator Hillary Clinton - who hasn’t really done much to catch my attention so far - has come up with an “insourcing” agenda for American business in the 21st Century. I am glad to see that someone is actually talking about this issue. It is refreshing to say the least, considering the record of her opponents.
In 2003, Sen. McCain authored an amendment that undermined long-standing rules requiring the U.S. military to only purchase equipment, defense systems and components manufactured in the United States. This set the stage for the Air Force’s decision to outsource the production of refueling tankers for the American military to Airbus. Had Boeing won the contract, over 44,000 new jobs would have been created here in the U.S.
As for Obama, at a campaign stop in Iowa back in 2007, he stated his support for using taxes to reign-in companies that send jobs overseas as well as enlisting education and infrastructure improvements to the cause of developing and retaining jobs here in the U.S. That is nice, as far as it goes, but we are well beyond the stage where vague platitudes mean much. Still, Obama at least is talking, and that is all to the good, but only Hillary has articulated a clear vision of how, step-by-step, she proposes to deal with this problem.
I am not sure if this is all campaign hot air or a sincere position that she would vigorously push for if elected, but the mere fact that the subject is on table and being discussed at all gives me some reason to hope that the decades-long hemorrhage of American jobs overseas might finally receive the critical attention that it is due. According to BlogHillary at HillaryClinton.com, the plan, which is both extensive and specific, includes, among other things, the creation of new insourcing markets using tax credits, ending other tax policies that encourage and reward offshore outsourcing and increasing research and development credits. Using the tax code to alter corporate behavior is not new and it is seldom universally popular. The hue and cry we will hear against this proposal-and against anything similar that the others might come up with-will come from those businesses affected by the changes proposed to the tax code and from their supporters in Congress. However, those voices of dissent are, I believe, missing the bigger picture.
While a free market where goods and services from around the world are easily bought and sold, and business can thrive without concern for boundaries and frontiers is an ideal state of affairs, we do not live in such a world. We compete with nations that hold their entire means of production within their own borders, support the work and prosperity of their people over that of the corporate entities that exist within their borders and certainly over the prosperity of other nations. We face stiff tariffs on our own goods and services while at the same time offering “Most Favored Nation” status to those same protectionist nations. The truth is that we are attempting to use the Free Market or Laissez-faire economic philosophy of Adam Smith and David Hume in the face of a world that still uses Mercantilist policies.
The difference between the two philosophies is fairly straightforward. Generally speaking, Laissez-faire theory holds that private initiative and production should be free of State economic intervention and taxation over and above what is necessary to protect individual liberty, peace, security, and property rights. Mercantilism, which has roots as far back as the Roman Empire, is not directed so much by abstract economic ideas as by concerns for the political, commercial and security issues of the State. Mercantilism is distinctly protectionist, with taxes and tariffs on imports and is often equated with a regulated economy. It has also been equated to warfare-economic, not the shooting kind-and was, in fact, one of the many influences that drove the American colonies of the 18th century to seek independence.
By this definition, Senator Clinton’s proposal would certainly fall under the Laissez-faire banner by bringing jobs back to the United States, thus protecting individual peace and security without resorting to punitive tariffs on imports that would put our products at a further disadvantage (punitive tariffs are a separate matter). This certainly goes along with her position during a 2007 Democratic National Debate: “People ask me, am I a free trader or a fair trader? I want to be a smart, pro-American trader. And that means we look for ways to maximize the impact of what we’re trying to export and quit being taken advantage of by other countries.” That is a good, solid position for a presidential candidate to take, but I have to question her commitment. Back in 2005, she defended the outsourcing of jobs from America. During a trip to India, which is one of the primary beneficiaries of American outsourcing, she said, “Outsourcing will continue. There is no way to legislate against reality.” She then went on to acknowledge the political and economic realities of outsourcing back at home. “I have to be frank,” she said. “People in my country are losing their jobs, and U.S. policymakers need to address this issue.”
Of course, her most recent proposal is doing just what she said you could not, legislating against reality. Or is it? Is it reality to say that there is nothing that can be done about outsourcing or is it reality to say that our politicians simply lack the political will to do something about it? After all, these companies do tend to fill the campaign coffers of those in power very nicely and money does talk. Call me a cynic, but is there really such a change in political will when one goes from being a sitting senator to being a presidential candidate? Personally, I doubt it. The big difference is that you are on the stage in a way that you never had to be before and with that bright light on you, you better say something the audience wants to hear.
She knew, back in 2005, that the people were tired of American jobs going overseas and yet only now, on the downhill slope toward the 2008 presidential elections, does she have something cogent to say about it. Only now has she found the will to propose a solution for it, to legislate against what she once called “reality” and bring these jobs home. Is it a sincere position, one she will make into a new “reality?” I don’t know. The cynic in me says it’s all a nice talking point to get one over on Obama and McCain, but that there is little or no substance to it. Of course, even if she is really on the up-and-up and manages to win and works to set her agenda into motion; the odds of it making it through Congress without being substantially weakened or perverted are pretty small.
Don’t lose heart. The specific proposal-even the fact that it came from Hillary Clinton-is actually irrelevant. The important thing is that the conversation has begun, that the topic is now on the national agenda, where it should have been years ago, and once there, it will not be stifled. That is where you come in as a citizen, an entrepreneur, a small business owner.
Outsourcing jobs overseas hurts people and it hurts small businesses since it cuts into your customer base. Think about it: People who lose their jobs don’t have the disposable income they need to viably support local economies. That, in turn, means that the small businesses dependent on those local economies suffer since fewer customers are available. I urge you to contact your senators and congressmen and let them know that you want-no, demand-that the flood of American jobs going overseas ends. To find your congressmen, go to http://www.house.gov. To reach your senators, visit http://www.senate.gov. Finally, to reach the President, visit http://www.whitehouse.gov.
Sometimes, when those in the halls of power lose their backbones, it is up to the people to find and return them.
About the author: Charles Cooper is the Web Editor and blogger for http://www.gowithabc.com the Web site for America’s Best Companies. He is also a staff writer for America’s Best: The Magazine for Small Business Owners.
Source: EzineArticles.com
