The wheels of globalization could use a little grease

Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton and
200,000 residents of Ohio don’t like
the North American Free Trade Agreement.
Which of the two presidential
candidates dislikes NAFTA more is still
up for debate (and there already have
been more than 200 of those).

Regardless of one’s political leanings,
two things are certain: NAFTA
creates jobs, and NAFTA causes job
losses. The jobs that are lost are the
kind of blue-collar jobs that “aren’t
coming back,” as Sen. John McCain
stated in a recent trip to Michigan.
McCain is right.

Since its establishment in 1962,
the Trade Adjustment Assistance
program was thought to be our “deus
ex machina,” dutifully answering the
random riddles of global capitalism.
The program was tasked with “(providing)
aid to workers who lose their jobs
or whose hours of work and wages
are reduced as a result of increased
imports,” according to the Web site
of the U.S. Department of Labor.

Frankly, that the candidates have
not mentioned TAA speaks greatly to
its impotency. As the manufacturing
industry hemorrhages jobs, Americans
continue to rely on a nearly 50-year-old
policy to staunch the bleeding, and
tourniquets disguised as policies are
not long-term solutions.

NAFTA has increased trade among
the U.S., Canada and Mexico, but – in
the process – also has displaced jobs.
Those 200,000 Ohioans I mentioned
earlier used to have manufacturing
jobs, but since 2000, have lost their
jobs. On a broader scale, the U.S.
has lost 3 million such jobs since the
1990s, according to BusinessWeek
magazine.

The TAA program must institute
the following three reforms in order
to achieve its original purpose, regain
credibility and become relevant when
it is most needed: