Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Home
Hostname: page-component-5c569c448b-ckh7h Total loading time: 0.33 Render date: 2022-07-05T15:37:06.385Z Has data issue: true Feature Flags: { "shouldUseShareProductTool": true, "shouldUseHypothesis": true, "isUnsiloEnabled": true, "useRatesEcommerce": false, "useNewApi": true } hasContentIssue true

America and Trade Liberalization: The Limits of Institutional Reform

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  08 April 2014

Get access

Abstract

Among scholars, delegation of power to the US president in 1934 is widely believed to have been a necessary requisite for tariff reductions in ensuing years. According to conventional wisdom, delegation to the president sheltered Congress from constituent pressure thereby facilitating the opening of the US economy and the emergence of the United States as a world power. This article suggests a revision to our understanding of just how that occurred. Through a close study of the US tariff schedule between 1928 and 1964, focusing on highly protected products, we examine which products were subject to liberalization and at what time. After 1934, delegation led to a change in trade policy, not because Congress gave up their constitutional prerogative in this domain but because presidents were able to target the potential economic dislocation that derives from import competition to avoid the creation of a congressional majority willing to halt the trade agreements program.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © The IO Foundation 2014 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Bagwell, Kyle, and Staiger., Robert W. 2002. Economic Theory and the Interpretation of GATT/WTO. American Economist 46 (2):319.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bagwell, Kyle, and Staiger., Robert W. 2011. What Do Trade Negotiators Negotiate About? Empirical Evidence from the World Trade Organization. American Economic Review 101 (4):1238–73.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bailey, Michael A., Goldstein, Judith, and Weingast., Barry R. 1997. The Institutional Roots of American Trade Policy: Politics, Coalitions, and International Trade. World Politics 49 (3):309–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Baldwin, Richard. 1987. Politically Realistic Objective Functions and Trade Policy. Economic Letters 24:287–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Barton, John H., Goldstein, Judith L., Josling, Timothy E., and Steinberg., Richard H. 2006. The Evolution of the Trade Regime: Politics, Law, and Economics of the GATT and the WTO. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Broda, Christian, Limão, Nuno, and Weinstein., David E. 2008. Optimal Tariffs and Market Power: The Evidence. American Economic Review 98 (5):2032–65.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brown, William Adams Jr. 1950. The United States and the Restoration of World Trade: An Analysis and Appraisal of the ITO Charter and the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution.Google Scholar
Eckes, Alfred E. Jr. 1999. Opening America's Market: US Foreign Trade Policy Since 1776. Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press.Google Scholar
Fiorina, Morris P. 1978. Economic Retrospective Voting in American National Elections: A Micro-Analysis. American Journal of Political Science 22 (2):426–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fiorina, Morris P. 1989. Congress: Keystone to the Washington Establishment. 2nd ed. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Fiorina, Morris P. 2002. Parties and Partisanship: A Forty-Year Retrospective. Political Behavior 24 (2):93115.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gilligan, Michael J. 1997. Empowering Exporters: Reciprocity, Delegation, and Collective Action in American Trade Policy. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Goldstein, Judith. 1993. Ideas, Interests, and American Trade Policy. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
Goldstein, Judith, and Gulotty., Robert 2013a. Back to School: The Role of Economic Ideas in American Trade Policymaking. Working paper. Stanford, CA: Stanford University.Google Scholar
Goldstein, Judith, and Gulotty., Robert 2013b. Measured Mercantilism. Working paper. Stanford, CA: Stanford University.Google Scholar
Goldstein, Judith L., and Martin., Lisa L. 2000. Legalization, Trade Liberalization, and Domestic Politics: A Cautionary Note. International Organization 54 (3):603–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Haggard, Stephen. 1988. The Institutional Foundations of Hegemony: Explaining the Reciprocal Trade Agreements Act of 1934. International Organization 42 (1):91119.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hawkins, Harry C. 1951. Commercial Treaties and Agreements: Principles and Practice. New York: Rinehart.Google Scholar
Hiscox, Michael J. 1999. The Magic Bullet? The RTAA, Institutional Reform, and Trade Liberalization. International Organization 53 (4):669–98.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Irwin, Douglas A. 1998. Changes in US Tariffs: The Role of Import Prices and Commercial Policies. American Economic Review 88 (4):1015–26.Google Scholar
Irwin, Douglas A. 2002. Free Trade Under Fire. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Irwin, Douglas A. 2011. Peddling Protectionism: Smoot-Hawley and the Great Depression. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Irwin, Douglas A., Mavroidis, Petros C., and Sykes., Alan O. 2008. The Genesis of the GATT. New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Johnson, Harry G. 1953. Optimum Tariffs and Retaliation. The Review of Economic Studies 21 (2):142–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kennedy, John F. 1962. “Remarks Upon Signing the Trade Expansion Act,” 11 October. Gerhard Peters and John T. Woolley, The American Presidency Project. Available at <http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/?pid=8946>. Accessed 2 January 2014..+Accessed+2+January+2014.>Google Scholar
Keohane, Robert O. 1982. The Demand for International Regimes. International Organization 36 (2):325–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Krasner, Stephen D. 1976. State Power and the Structure of International Trade. World Politics 28 (3):317–47.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Manley, John F. 1970. The Politics of Finance: The House Committee on Ways and Means. Boston: Little, Brown, and Co. Google Scholar
McGillivray, Fiona. 1997. Party Discipline as a Determinant of the Endogenous Formation of Tariffs. American Journal of Political Science 41 (2):584607.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McKinzie, Richard D. 1973. Oral History Interview with John M. Leddy, 15 June, Washington, DC. Available at <http://trumanlibrary.org/oralhist/leddyj>. Accessed 20 November 2012..+Accessed+20+November+2012.>Google Scholar
Olson, Mancur. 1965. The Logic of Collective Action: Public Goods and the Theory of Groups. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
O'Rourke, Kevin H., and Williamson., Jeffrey G. 1999. Globalization and History: The Evolution of a Nineteenth-Century Atlantic Economy. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Porter, Kirk H., and Johnson., Donald Bruce 1961. National Party Platforms 18401960. Urbana: University of Illinois Press.Google Scholar
Rogowski, Ronald. 1989. Commerce and Coalitions: How Trade Affects Domestic Political Alignments. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Swift, Elaine K., Brookshire, Robert G., Canon, David T., Fink, Evelyn C., Hibbing, John R., Humes, Brian D., Malbin, Michael J., and Martis., Kenneth C. 2009. Database of [United States] Congressional Historical Statistics, 1789–1989. [computer file] (Study No. ICPSR03371-v2). Ann Arbor, MI: Inter-University Consortium for Political and Social Research. Available at <https://www.icpsr.umich.edu/icpsrweb/ICPSR/studies/3371?keyword=roll+call+data&permit%5B0%5D=AVAILABLE>..>Google Scholar
US Bureau of the Census. 1960. Historical Statistics of the United States, Colonial Times to 1957. Washington, DC.: Government Printing Office.Google Scholar
US House. 1934. Committee on Ways and Means. Hearings on Reciprocal Trade Agreements Act, 73d Cong., 2d sess., No. 1, 8 March.Google Scholar
US Senate. 1933. Economic Analysis of Foreign Trade of the United States in Relation to the Tariff (S. Res. 325), 72d Cong., 2d sess.Google Scholar
US Treasury. 1935. Treasury Decision 48405, United States Customs Court, 15 October. Washington, DC.Google Scholar
United States Tariff Commission. 1936. Concessions Granted by the United States in the Trade Agreement with the Kingdom of the Netherlands. Washington, DC.Google Scholar
United States Tariff Commission. 1936. Concessions Granted by the United States in the Trade Agreement with Switzerland. Washington, DC.Google Scholar
United States Tariff Commission. 1938. Trade Agreement Between the United States and the Czechoslovak Republic. Vol. IV–XXXVII, 256. Washington, DC.Google Scholar
United States Tariff Commission. 1938. Trade Agreement Between the United States and the United Kingdom. Vol. I–VII. Washington, DC.Google Scholar
United States Tariff Commission. 1940. Pre-Agreement and Post-Agreement Trade of the United States with the Principal Countries with Which Trade Agreements Were Made Before 1937. January. Washington, DC.Google Scholar
United States Tariff Commission. 1945. Trade Agreements: A Miscellany of Information. 16 April. Washington, DC.Google Scholar
World Trade Organization. 1998. Press Brief: Fiftieth Anniversary of the Multilateral Trading System. Available at <www.wto.org/english/thewto_e/minist_e/min96_e/chrono.htm>. Accessed 2 January 2014..+Accessed+2+January+2014.>Google Scholar
14
Cited by

Save article to Kindle

To save this article to your Kindle, first ensure coreplatform@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

America and Trade Liberalization: The Limits of Institutional Reform
Available formats
×

Save article to Dropbox

To save this article to your Dropbox account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you used this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your Dropbox account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

America and Trade Liberalization: The Limits of Institutional Reform
Available formats
×

Save article to Google Drive

To save this article to your Google Drive account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you used this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your Google Drive account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

America and Trade Liberalization: The Limits of Institutional Reform
Available formats
×
×

Reply to: Submit a response

Please enter your response.

Your details

Please enter a valid email address.

Conflicting interests

Do you have any conflicting interests? *