Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-x5gtn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-05-29T14:25:44.470Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Rethinking the American Industrial Policy Debate: The Political Significance of a Losing Idea

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  14 March 2024

TOM WRAIGHT
TOM WRAIGHT*
Affiliation:
Leeds Beckett University
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

In the early 1980s “industrial policy” seemed to be emerging as the American left’s answer to supply-side economics. Yet soon after, supply-side economics was triumphant and industrial policy back in the political wilderness. This article investigates why the American left rejected industrial policy in the 1980s but appears to be reembracing it under the Biden administration. Via reviewing the history of the industrial policy debate, I argue that the American left rejected industrial policy proposals for several reasons including disunity within the Democratic party coalition, the growing strength of the venture capital industry, and the perceived incompatibility of industrial policy with American political institutions. Despite the defeat of industrial policy movement in the 1980s, however, I argue that a process of adaptation and reworking during the Clinton administration allowed industrial policy ideas to survive in “hibernation,” ultimately reemerging in the changed policy environment which followed the 2008 financial crisis.

Keywords

Industrial Policysupply-side economicsAmerican political institutionsClinton AdministrationBiden industrial policy
Type
Article
Information
Journal of Policy History , Volume 36 , Issue 2 , April 2024 , pp. 191 - 214
Copyright
© Donald Critchlow and Cambridge University Press, 2024

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

NOTES

1. Tulis, Jeffrey K. and Mellow, Nicole, Legacies of Losing in American Politics (Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press, 2018)Google Scholar.

2. Graham, Otis L. Jr. Losing Time: The Industrial Policy Debate (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1992)Google Scholar.

3. Thurow, Lester C., The Zero-Sum Society: Distribution and the Possibilities for Change (New York: Basic Books, 1980)Google Scholar; Reich, Robert, “Why the US Needs an Industrial Policy,” Harvard Business Review 60 (January–February 1982): 74–81 Google Scholar; Magaziner, Ira C. and Reich, Robert B., Minding America’s Business: The Decline and Rise of the American Economy (New York: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich, 1982)Google Scholar; Bluestone, Barry and Harrison, Bennett, The Deindustrialization of America: Plant Closings, Community Abandonment, and the Dismantling of Basic Industry (New York: Basic Books, 1982)Google Scholar; Zysman, John and Tyson, Laura, American Industry in International Competition: Government Policies and Corporate Strategies (Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 1983)Google Scholar.

4. Industrial Policy Movement in the United States: Is It the Answer? A Staff Study Prepared for the use of the Joint Economic Committee Congress of the United States (Washington, DC: U.S. Government Publishing Office, 1984), 18–22.

5. Campbell, John L., “Institutional Analysis and the Role of Ideas in Political Economy,” Theory and Society 27, no. 3 (1998): 377–409 CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

6. “Joe Biden’s Industrial Policy Is Big, Bold and Fraught with Difficulty,” The Economist, September 13, 2022, https://www.economist.com/united-states/2022/09/13/joe-bidens-industrial-policy-is-big-bold-and-fraught-with-difficulty.

7. Alexander Kaufman, “Democrat’s Green New Deal Wing Takes Shape amid Wave of Progressive Climate Hawk Wins,” Huffington Post, July 11, 2018, https://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/green-new-deal-progressive-democrats_n_5be26f5be4b0769d24c6a954.

8. Tulis and Mellow, Legacies of Losing in American Politics, 1.

9. Tulis and Mellow, 10.

10. Orren, Karen and Skowronek, Stephen, The Search for American Political Development (New York: Cambridge University Press, 2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

11. Hall, Peter A, “Policy Paradigms, Social Learning, and the State: The Case of Economic Policymaking in Britain,” Comparative Politics 25, no. 3 (1993): 275–96CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

12. Berman, S., “Ideational Theorising in the Social Sciences since ‘Policy Paradigms, Social Learning and the State,’” Governance 26, no. 2 (2013): 217–37CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Hogan, John and Howlet, Michael, “Reflections on Our Understanding of Policy Paradigms and Policy Change,” in Policy Paradigms in Theory and Practice: Discourses, Ideas and Anomalies in Public Policy Dynamics, ed. Hogan, John and Howlett, Michael (London: Palgrave Macmillan, 2015), 3–18 CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

13. Carstensen, Martin B., “Paradigm Man vs. the Bricoleur: An Alternative Vision of Agency in Ideational Change,” European Political Science Review 3, no. 1 (2011): 147–67CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

14. Fraser, Steve and Gerstle, Gary, ed., The Rise and Fall of the New Deal Order, 1930-1980. (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1989)Google Scholar.

15. Vogel, Ezra F., Japan as Number One: Lessons for America (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1979)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Japanese and American Economic Policies and US Productivity: Hearings Before the Joint Economic Committee, 92nd Cong. (1972).

16. Domitrovic, Brian, Econoclasts: The Rebels Who Sparked the Supply-Side Movement and Restored American Prosperity (Wilmington, DE: Intercollegiate Studies Institute, 2012)Google Scholar.

17. Bartlett, Bruce, “The Joint Economic Committee in the Early 1980s: Keynesians versus Supply-Siders,” Journal of Policy History 27, no. 1 (2015): 184–95CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

18. Most famously, George H. W. Bush described supply side ideas as “voodoo economics.”

19. Blyth, Mark, Great Transformations: Economic Ideas and Institutional Change in the Twentieth Century (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Widmaier, Wesley, Economic Ideas in Political Time: The Rise and Fall of Economic Orders from the Progressive Era to the Global Financial Crisis (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

20. Graham, Losing Time: The Industrial Policy Debate.

21. Graham, Losing Time.

22. Krugman, Paul R., “Increasing Returns, Monopolistic Competition, and International Trade,” Journal of International Economics 9, no. 4 (November 1, 1979): 469–79CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

23. Vogel, Japan as Number One: Lessons for America; Chalmers Johnson, MITI and the Japanese Miracle: The Growth of Industrial Policy, 1925-1975 (Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press, 1982).

24. Cebul, Brent, “Supply-Side Liberalism: Fiscal Crisis, Post Industrial Policy and the Rise of the New Democrats,” Modern American History 2, no. 2 (2019): 139–64CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

25. Quoted in Graham, Losing Time: The Industrial Policy Debate, 167.

26. Edward Schmults, “Memo to James Baker on Industrial Policy and the 1984 Campaign,” 1983, https://www.reaganlibrary.gov/sites/default/files/digitallibrary/smof/cos/cicconi/box-10/40-94-6914308-010-005-2016.pdf.

27. Charles Shultze, “Industrial Policy: A Dissent,” The Brookings Review (October 1983): 3–12; Lawrence, Robert, Can America Compete? (Washington, DC: Brookings Institution Press, 1984)Google Scholar; Krugman, Paul R., “Targeted Industrial Policies: Theory and Evidence,” in Industrial Change and Public Policy Symposium (Jackson Hole, WY: Federal Reserve Bank of Kansas City, 1983), 123–56Google Scholar; Graham, Losing Time, 118–49.

28. Industrial Policy, Economic Growth and the Competitiveness of US Industry: Hearings Before the Joint Economic Committee, 98th Cong., Part 1, 32 (1983).

29. Industrial Policy, Economic Growth and the Competitiveness of US Industry, Part 1, 32.

30. Reich, “Why the US Needs an Industrial Policy,” 2.

31. Fraser and Gerstle, The Rise and Fall of the New Deal Order, 1930-1980.

32. Domitrovic, Econoclasts: The Rebels Who Sparked the Supply-Side Movement and Restored American Prosperity.

33. Shultze, “Industrial Policy: A Dissent.”

34. Berman, Elizabeth Popp, Thinking Like an Economist (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 2022)Google Scholar.

35. Horwitz, Robert B., America’s Right: Anti-Establishment Conservatism from Goldwater to the Tea Party (Cambridge: Polity Press, 2013)Google Scholar.

36. Industrial Policy, Economic Growth and the Competitiveness of US Industry, Part 1, 52.

37. Industrial Policy, Economic Growth and the Competitiveness of US Industry, Part 1, 82.

38. Industrial Policy: Hearings before the House Banking Subcomittee on Economic Stablization, 98th Cong., Part 3, 677 (1983).

39. Venture Capital and Innovation. A Study Prepared for the Use of the Joint Economic Committee, Congress of the US, 98th Cong., 2d Sess. 24 (1984).

40. Venture Capital and Innovation, 51.

41. Industrial Policy: Hearings Before the House Banking Subcomittee on Economic Stablization, 98th Cong., Part 4, 71 (1983).

42. Quoted in Graham, Losing Time, 167.

43. Badaracco, Joseph L. Jr. and Yoffie, David B., “‘Industrial Policy’: It Can’t Happen Here,” Harvard Business Review 61 (November–December 1983): 97–105 Google Scholar.

44. Industrial Policy, Economic Growth and the Competitiveness of US Industry: Hearings Before the Joint Economic Committee, 98th Cong., Part 3, 9 (1983).

45. Industrial Policy, Economic Growth and the Competitiveness of US Industry: Hearings Before the Joint Economic Committee, 98th Cong., Part 3, 34.

46. Dearborn, John, Congress and Presidential Representation (Chicago: Chicago University Press, 2021)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

47. Badaracco and Yoffie, “‘Industrial Policy’: It Can’t Happen Here,” 14.

48. Industrial Policy, Economic Growth and the Competitiveness of US Industry: Hearings Before the Joint Economic Committee, 98th Cong., Part 1, 18, 22.

49. Industrial Policy: Hearings before the House Banking Subcomittee on Economic Stablization of the Committee on Banking, Finance, and Urban Affairs, 98th Cong., Part 3, 517 (1983).

50. The Industrial Policy Movement in the United States: Is It the Answer? 67.

51. Magaziner, Ira, “Rhode Island: The Defeat of the Greenhouse Compact,” New England Journal of Public Policy 2, no. 1 (1986): 48–72 Google Scholar.

52. Morris, Narrelle, Japan-Bashing: Anti-Japanism since the 1980s (Abingdon: Routledge, 2011)Google Scholar.

53. Irwin, Douglas A., Clashing over Commerce: A History of US Trade Policy (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2017)CrossRefGoogle Scholar, chap. 12.

54. Hughes, Kent H., Building the Next American Century: The Past and Future of American Economic Competitiveness (Baltimore, MD: John Hopkins University Press, 2005)Google Scholar.

55. Robert B. Reich, The Work of Nations : Preparing Ourselves for 21st-Century Capitalism (A. A. Knopf, 1991); Tyson, Laura, Who’s Bashing Whom? Trade Conflict in High-Technology Industries (Washington, DC: Peterson Institute for International Economics, 1992)Google Scholar.

56. Tyson.

57. Robert Reich, “Who Is Us?” Harvard Business Review, 1990.

58. Reich.

59. Industrial Policy: Hearings Before the House Banking Subcomittee on Economic Stablization, 98th Congress,” Part 3, 514 (1983).

60. Cebul, “Supply-Side Liberalism: Fiscal Crisis, Post Industrial Policy and the Rise of the New Democrats.”

61. Hughes, Kent H., Building the Next American Century: The Past and Future of American Economic Competitiveness (Baltimore, MD: John Hopkins University Press, 2005)Google Scholar.

62. Michael Schrage, “Clinton’s Budget Makes an Art of Funding Science and Technology,” Washington Post, February 11, 1994, https://www.washingtonpost.com/archive/business/1994/02/11/clintons-budget-makes-an-art-of-funding-science-and-technology/c5aa6420-896c-4f37-bb26-080cb179672a/.

63. Cebul, “Supply-Side Liberalism: Fiscal Crisis, Post Industrial Policy and the Rise of the New Democrats,” 161.

64. Bill Clinton, “Statement on Signing the Taxpayer Relief Act of 1997,” in The American Presidency Project (online), ed. John Woolley and Gerhard Peters, https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/statement-signing-the-taxpayer-relief-act-1997.

65. David Welna, “Times Have Changed since Reagan’s 1986 Tax Reform,” NPR, October 17, 2011, 2.

66. Statement on behalf of the National Venture Capital Association, submitted to the House Committee on Ways and Means, February 5, 1992.

67. Manufacturing Alliance for Productivity and Innovation, Why U.S. Companies are at a Competitive Disadvantage (1991), 1.

68. Kunkel, John, American Trade Policy Towards Japan: Demanding Results (London: Routledge, 2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar, chap. 9.

69. David Lauter, “Clinton Unveils $13-Billion Job Training, Counseling Bill,” Los Angeles Times, March 10, 1994, https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-1994-03-10-mn-32331-story.html.

70. Wade, Robert, “Return of Industrial Policy?” International Review of Applied Economics 26, no. 2 (2012): 223–39CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

71. Bloomfield, Jon and Steward, Fred, “The Politics of the Green New Deal,” The Political Quarterly 91, no. 4 (2020): 770–79CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

72. Morris, Adele, Nivola, Pietro, and Charles, Schultze, “Clean Energy: Revisiting the Challenges of Industrial Policy,” Energy Economics 34, no. 1 (2012): 34–43 CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

73. David Popp et al., “The Employment Impact of a Green Fiscal Push. Evidence from the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act,” Brookings Papers on Economic Activity, 2021, 1–69.

74. David Ikenson, “GE and Obama: A Betrothal at the Altar of Industrial Policy,” Cato Commentary, 2011, https://policycommons.net/artifacts/1303632/ge-and-obama/1906924/.

75. Chris Good, “The Solyndra Scandal: What It Is and Why It Matters,” The Atlantic, September 15, 2011.

76. Nymalm, Nicola, From “Japan Problem” to “China Threat”? Rising Powers in US Economic Discourse (London: Palgrave Macmillan, 2020)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

77. “Robert Lighthizer,” in Hearing: Evaluating China’s Past and Future Role in the World Trade Organisation, Panel II, U.S. and Chinese Expectations for China’s Entry in the WTO (The U.S.-China Economic and Security Review Commission, 2010), https://www.uscc.gov/hearings/hearing-evaluating-chinas-past-and-future-role-world-trade-organization.

78. Blustein, Paul, Schism: China, America and the Fracturing of the Global Trading System (Waterloo, ON: Centre for International Governance Innovation, 2019)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

79. Bown, Chad P., “How COVID-19 Medical Supply Shortages Led to Extraordinary Trade and Industrial Policy,” Asian Economic Policy Review 17, no. 1 (2021): 114–35CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

80. William Bonvillian, Emerging Industrial Policy Approaches in the United States, Information Technology & Innovation Foundation, October 4, 2021, https://itif.org/publications/2021/10/04/emerging-industrial-policy-approaches-united-states/.

81. “Joe Biden’s Industrial Policy Is Big, Bold and Fraught with Difficulty.”