158 KO Free Trade Good

Free Trade Good
DDI 2008 KO
Sarah Ungureit
Free Trade Good

Free Trade Good....................................................................................................................................................1
Key to economy......................................................................................................................................................2
Key to economy......................................................................................................................................................3
Key to economy......................................................................................................................................................4
Key to economy.....................................................................................................................................................5
Key to economy......................................................................................................................................................6
Environment..........................................................................................................................................................7
Environment..........................................................................................................................................................8
Environment..........................................................................................................................................................9
Environment........................................................................................................................................................10
Environment........................................................................................................................................................11
increases productivity.........................................................................................................................................12
US Leadership.....................................................................................................................................................13
US Leadership.....................................................................................................................................................14
Creates Jobs.........................................................................................................................................................15
Creates Jobs.........................................................................................................................................................16
Increases Competition........................................................................................................................................17
Increases Competition........................................................................................................................................18
Promotes Peace....................................................................................................................................................19
Promotes Peace....................................................................................................................................................20
Prevents War.......................................................................................................................................................21
Spreads Democracy............................................................................................................................................22
US Interests..........................................................................................................................................................25
International Cooperation..................................................................................................................................26
Economic Development.......................................................................................................................................27
Corruption............................................................................................................................................................28
Economic Reform.................................................................................................................................................29
1
Free Trade Good
DDI 2008 KO
Sarah Ungureit
Key to economy
Free trade helps the economy
Marian L. Tupy, is assistant director of the Project on Global Economic Liberty CATO institute, 1/3/06 “Free
Trade Benefits All” http://www.cato.org/pub_display.php?pub_id=5354
There are three important reasons voluntary exchange is good not only for the contracting parties but the world as a whole: (1) Trade
improves global efficiency in resource allocation. A glass of water may be of little value to someone living near the river but is
priceless to a person crossing the Sahara. Trade delivers goods and services to those who value them most. (2) Trade allows partners to
gain from specializing in the producing those goods and services they do best. Economists call that the law of comparative advantage.
When producers create goods they are comparatively skilled at, such as Germans producing beer and the French producing wine,
those goods increase in abundance and quality. (3) Trade allows consumers to benefit from more efficient production methods. For
example, without large markets for goods and services, large production runs would not be economical. Large production runs, in turn,
are instrumental to reducing product costs. Lower production costs lead to cheaper goods and services, which raises real living
standards. Evidence supports the idea nations more open to trade tend to be richer than those that are less open. Columbia University
economist Arvind Panagariya wrote in a paper "Miracles and Debacles: Do Free-Trade Skeptics Have a Case?": "On the poverty front,
there is overwhelming evidence that trade openness is a more trustworthy friend of the poor than protectionism. Few countries have
grown rapidly without a simultaneous rapid expansion of trade. In turn, rapid growth has almost always led to reduction in poverty."
According to the Cato Institute's 2004 report on Economic Freedom of the World, which measures economic freedom in 123
countries, the per capita gross domestic product in the quintile of countries with the most restricted trading was only $1,883 in 2002.
That year's per capita GDP in the quintile of countries with the freest trading regimes was $23,938.
Free trade key to US economy.

Daniella Markheim – Senior Trade Policy Analyst in the Center for International Trade and Economics at the
Heritage Foundation, 4/16/07, Heritage Foundation, “Why Free Trade Works for America,” Backgrounder
#2024, http://www.heritage.org/Research/TradeandForeignAid/bg2024.cfm)
The gains from freer trade are substantial. Today, the $12 trillion U.S. economy is bolstered by free trade, a pillar of America's vitality.
In 2005, U.S. exports to the rest of the world totaled $1.2 trillion and supported one in five U.S. manufacturing jobs. Jobs directly
linked to the export of goods pay 13 percent to 18 percent more than other U.S. jobs. Moreover, agricultural exports hit a record high
in 2005 and now account for 926,000 jobs. In Colorado, international trade supports one of every 20 private-sector jobs and more
than 16 percent of manufacturing jobs. International trade supports an estimated 6.1 percent of Ohio's total private-sector employment
and more than 20 percent of all manufacturing jobs. In South Carolina, trade supports one of every 10 private-sector jobs and more
than 23 percent of manufacturing jobs. State by state across America, international trade promotes opportunity. The service sector
accounts for roughly 79 percent of the U.S. economy and 30 percent of the value of American exports. Service industries account for
eight out of every 10 jobs in the U.S. and provide more jobs than the rest of the economy combined. Over the past 20 years, service
industries have contributed about 40 million new jobs across America. As today's global economy offers unparalleled opportunities
for the U.S., continuing to expand trade by lowering barriers to goods and services is in America's economic interest. Freer trade
policies have created a level of competition in today's open market that engenders innovation and leads to better products, higher-
paying jobs, new markets, and increased savings and investment. Small business, a critical component of the U.S. economy, creates
two out of every three new jobs and accounts for about one-quarter of America's exports. With more than 95 percent of the world's
consumers living outside of the United States, the global marketplace is important to U.S. firms. Free trade opens the door to that
marketplace and promotes America's continuing prosperity.
2
Free Trade Good
DDI 2008 KO
Sarah Ungureit
Key to economy
Free trade key to economic growth
Tim Kane, Ph.D Director of Center of International Trade and Economics, 7/27/07 “Surprises in the Bullish
GDP Report” Heritage Foundation, heritage.org)
Today's report marks the first time since 1991 (65 quarterly reports ago) when the contribution from net exports exceeded
consumption. This fact is especially significant when one observes that net exports, like profits, frequently go into negative territory,
unlike consumption which is almost always growing to some degree. Some will argue that the declining dollar is helping to restore the
trade balance, but investment flows are a much larger influence on exchange rates. Furthermore, it is investment policy where the U.S.
may face the most significant downside risk.
Congress has all but shut down the trade agenda in recent months and is prepared to pass a dramatic new law to "fix" currency
misalignment—a euphemistic approach to raising tariffs on trade with China. Likewise, congressional efforts to "fix" inequality have
focused on raising taxes, notably on capital formation. The rhetoric of fighting inequality plays well politically, but if anti-capital
legislation moves ahead, the main casualties will be American jobs and wages. Investors will not wait for the bills to become law and
will preemptively start pulling out of U.S. equities and bonds as soon as the bills move through committee.
Free trade key to economic growth.

Ana Isabel Eiras. Senior Policy Analyst for International Economics in the Center for International Trade and
Economics at The Heritage Foundation 5/24/04 (Heritage Foundation, “Why America Needs to Support Free
Trade,” Backgrounder #1761, http://www.heritage.org/Research/TradeandForeignAid/bg1761.cfm)
Economic freedom is essential to economic growth, and the true measure of economic freedom involves more than just the question of
whether tariff and non-tariff trade barriers are present. It involves other barriers to commerce such as inflationary pressures,
regulations that make it more difficult to do business, restrictive banking systems, whether or not property rights are protected, and the
fiscal burden of government. The data presented over the past seven years in the annual Heritage Foundation/Wall Street Journal
Index of Economic Freedom show clearly that the economies of countries that open their markets grow at a faster pace than the
economies of countries that open their markets less or not at all. (See Chart 2.) Of the 142 nations whose economies have been
observed during this seven-year period, those that opened their markets the most grew twice as fast as those that opened them the
least. A growing economy increases the demand for goods and services, and as demand increases, more businesses start and expand
their operations. Such expansion leads to the creation of more, better-paid jobs. The same is true when the market expands beyond
borders. Gaining free access to other markets opens up new business opportunities, encouraging investment and fostering job creation.
3
Free Trade Good
DDI 2008 KO
Sarah Ungureit
Key to economy
Free trade is critical to economic growth.
Denise H. Froning, former Trade Policy Analyst in the Center for International Trade and Economics at The
Heritage Foundation., 8/25/00, "The Benefits of Free Trade: A Guide For Policymakers"
http://www.heritage.org/Research/TradeandForeignAid/BG1391.cfm
International trade is the framework upon which American prosperity rests. Free trade policies have created a level of competition in
today's open market that engenders continual innovation and leads to better products, better-paying jobs, new markets, and increased
savings and investment. Free trade enables more goods and services to reach American consumers at lower prices, thereby
substantially increasing their standard of living. Moreover, the benefits of free trade extend well beyond American households. Free
trade helps to spread the value of freedom, reinforce the rule of law, and foster economic development in poor countries. The national
debate over trade-related issues too often ignores these important benefits. The positive effects of an open market are clearly evident in
the stellar growth of the U.S. economy over the past decade. Since 1990, the U.S. economy has grown by more than 23 percent,
adding more than $2.1 trillion to the nation's gross domestic product (GDP) and raising the wealth of the average American consumer
by more than $5,500.2 The economy responded well to the expansion of trade that occurred after the signing of the North American
Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) in 1993 and the establishment of the World Trade Organization (WTO) in 1995 as a forum for
settling trade disputes. For example:
Free trade fosters economic growth.

Ana Isabel Eiras, Senior Policy Analyst for International Economics in the Center for International Trade and
Economics at The Heritage Foundation, 5/24/04. “Why America Needs to Support Free Trade”, The Heritage
Foundation, http://www.heritage.org/Research/TradeandForeignAid/bg1761.cfm
Economic freedom is essential to economic growth, and the true measure of economic freedom involves more than just the question of
whether tariff and non-tariff trade barriers are present. It involves other barriers to commerce such as inflationary pressures,
regulations that make it more difficult to do business, restrictive banking systems, whether or not property rights are protected, and the
fiscal burden of government. The data presented over the past seven years in the annual Heritage Foundation/Wall Street Journal Index
of Economic Freedom show clearly that the economies of countries that open their markets grow at a faster pace than the economies
of countries that open their markets less or not at all. (See Chart 2.) Of the 142 nations whose economies have been observed during
this seven-year period, those that opened their markets the most grew twice as fast as those that opened them the least. A growing
economy increases the demand for goods and services, and as demand increases, more businesses start and expand their operations.
Such expansion leads to the creation of more, betterpaid jobs. The same is true when the market expands beyond borders. Gaining free
access to other markets opens up new business opportunities, encouraging investment and fostering job creation.
Free trade spurs global economic growth.

A growing number of countries continue to share the benefits of America's emphasis on trade. As noted in a recent report by the
International Financial Institution Advisory Commission chaired by Allan H. Meltzer, a former member of the President's Council of
Economic Advisers and Professor of Political Economy at Carnegie Mellon University: The Congress, successive administrations, and
the American public can be proud of these achievements. The United States has been the leader in maintaining peace and stability,
promoting democracy and the rule of law, reducing trade barriers, and establishing a transnational financial system. Americans and
their allies have willingly provided the manpower and money to make many of these achievements possible. The benefits have been
widely shared by the citizens of developed and developing countries. The dynamic American economy benefited along with the rest of
the world. Growth of trade spread benefits widely. Per capita consumption in the United States tripled. As in other countries, higher
educational attainment, improved health services, increased longevity, effective environmental programs, and other social benefits
accompanied or followed economic gains.
4
Free Trade Good
DDI 2008 KO
Sarah Ungureit
Key to economy
Free Trade improves economy – Korea-U.S. FTA proves
Christopher Padilla, U.S. under secretary of commerce for international trade, 6/8/08 “Trade openness key to
vibrant economy” http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0608/11179.html
There are few borders like the one at Panmunjom, Korea. On one side of the demilitarized zone that divides the village, a vibrant
democracy is further opening its economy to the world, and citizens freely express their opinions. On the other side, one of the world’s
last Stalinist regimes has elevated economic isolation into a state religion, and discourse consists only of the mindless repetition of
propaganda. Like no other place on Earth, the Korean peninsula starkly demonstrates the difference between openness and oppression.
In just a few days, we will mark the first anniversary of the signing of the Korea-U.S. Free Trade Agreement. Two successive Korean
governments from opposite ends of the political spectrum have taken a bold stance in favor of opening South Korea’s economy to U.S.
goods and services. This landmark deal would add more than $10 billion to the U.S. economy and set a precedent for greater openness
in East Asia. Yet the Korea trade agreement and another with Colombia both face high hurdles in Congress, apparent victims of
election-year politics.
Free trade key to economic growth

Daniella Markheim, Jay Van Andel Senior Trade Policy Analyst in the Center for International Trade and
Economics at The Heritage Foundation, 4/16/07 “Why Free Trade Works for America”
http://www.heritage.org/research/tradeandforeignaid/bg2024.cfm
U.S. trade policy and the impact of globalization on America are regularly the subjects of contentious debate both on Capitol Hill and
in the media, and 2007 promises more of the same. The free trade argument is played out between those that fear the perceived
negative effects of freer trade on their own narrow interests and those that embrace the economic and strategic benefits that open
market policies will bring to the economy as a whole. Consequently, in today’s policy world, free trade legislation passes on the
margin, where every vote is critical. The loss of even a few proponents of freer trade policies could result in a costly shift away from
the open market policies that have helped to bolster America’s economic growth. With free trade agreements (FTAs) with Peru,
Colombia, Panama, and South Korea needing congressional approval; Trade Adjustment Assistance up for renewal; the struggle to
advance multilateral trade talks in the World Trade Organization (WTO); and, critically, the need to extend the President’s trade
promotion authority (TPA) this summer, policymakers have ample opportunity to implement a more protectionist policy stance or to
stay the course and continue to allow America to reap the benefits of open market policies.
Freer Trade promotes economic growth and prosperity

Hiding from or ignoring the debate about globalization and its effect on the U.S. will not promote a free trade agenda. Rather, this
approach merely leaves the voice of protectionism as the only voice heard on trade policy issues. Instead, a firm public commitment to
advancing sound open market policies coupled with a presentation of the facts about the effect of freer trade and investment on
America will better help to advance the cause of open market policies. For America to continue to reap the benefits of globalization
and to lead the world in demonstrating how globalization progresses and evolves, the President and Congress should make a solid and
public commitment to advancing open market policies. Without political leadership on trade issues, the facts behind the benefits of
America’s international trade and investment policies will have to suffice in the battle to keep U.S. markets open and global trade
liberalization moving forward. Not only does trade liberalization make sense from a theoretical perspective, but the data show that
freer trade promotes economic growth and prosperity. Free trade is about beating poverty and expanding economic opportunity—
markedly nonpartisan issues. While working through trade policy legislation this year, Congress will have the opportunity to advocate
free trade and to help America and the world reap the rewards that accrue from such policies. It is essential that lawmakers separate
myth from fact and assess upcoming trade initiatives objectively. Armed with the facts, they can then help to ensure that prosperity in
the U.S. and around the world has a real chance to thrive, both this year and in the longer term.
5
Free Trade Good
DDI 2008 KO
Sarah Ungureit
Key to economy
Free trade helps the U.S. economy and increases competition
As today’s global economy offers unparalleled opportunities for the U.S., continuing to expand trade by lowering barriers to goods
and services is in America’s economic interest. Freer trade policies have created a level of competition in today’s open market that
engenders innovation and leads to better products, higher-paying jobs, new markets, and increased savings and investment. Small
business, a critical component of the U.S. economy, creates two out of every three new jobs and accounts for about one-quarter of
America’s exports. With more than 95 percent of the world’s consumers living outside of the United States, the global marketplace is
important to U.S. firms. Free trade opens the door to that marketplace and promotes America’s continuing prosperity. For over five
decades, the U.S. has earned benefits from reducing its trade barriers, paving the way for substantial economic expansion and higher
standards of living. Chart 1 illustrates some specific facts about free trade and the U.S. economy: •
Free trade promotes economic growth and poverty reduction

Griswold, Associated Director of the Center for Trade Policy Studies at the CATO Institute, 9/1/00 (Daniel,
“The Blessings and Challenges of Globalization,” , http://www.freetrade.org/pubs/articles/dg-9-1-00.html)
Globalization offers hope to the world's poorest. Just as more open trade tends to promote economic growth, growth in turn leads to
poverty reduction. A World Bank study found that periods of sustained economic growth are almost always accompanied by
reductions in poverty. Specifically, the study found that poverty fell in 77 of the 88 decade- long periods of growth covered by the
survey. The greatest reductions in poverty in the last twenty years have occurred in nations that have moved decisively toward
openness and domestic liberalization. The most spectacular gains have been realized in East Asia. Between 1993 and '96, the number
of people living in absolute poverty--what the World Bank defines as less than $ 1 per day-- declined in the region from 432 million to
267 million. In China alone, the number of poor people so defined fell by 150 million between 1990 and '97.13 The 1997--98 financial
crisis that began in East Asia brought a temporary halt to this progress, but poverty rates in the hardest-hit countries--Korea, Thailand,
and Indonesia--have begun to decline back toward their precrisis levels. Globally, the number of people living in absolute poverty has
declined in the 1990s to an estimated 1.2 billion in 1998. Globalization facilitates the spread of modern medicine, which has helped to
extend life expectancy and reduce infant mortality in rich and poor countries alike. On average, life expectancy in developing
countries rose from 55 years in 1970 to 65 years in 1997. This good news is tempered by the fact that life expectancy has actually
fallen in thirty-three LDCs since 1990, in large part because of AIDS epidemics, and remains far behind the OECD average of 78
years. Infant mortality rates in Asia and sub-Saharan Africa have fallen by about 10 percent since 1990. Opponents of globalization try
to blame poverty in the world on the spread of trade and investment liberalization. But those regions where poverty and inequality
have been the most visible and intransigent for decades--Latin America, sub-Saharan Africa, and the Indian subcontinent-- for most of
that time self-consciously followed policies of economic centralization and isolation.
6
Free Trade Good
DDI 2008 KO
Sarah Ungureit
Environment
Free trade helps the environment
An artificial distinction has been drawn between “free trade” and “fair trade.” The idea that free trade is fair only if countries share
identical labor costs and economic regulations or if domestic producers are compensated for market losses to more competitive foreign
producers is false. The economic benefits of free trade derive partly from the fact that trading partners are different, allowing any
country embracing world markets a chance to be competitive. Free trade is fair when countries with different advantages are allowed
to trade with a minimum of restriction and capitalize on those differences. Low wage costs, access to cheap capital, education levels,
and other fundamental variables all play a role in determining the comparative advantages that one country has over another in the
global marketplace. To “fairly” equalize those differences— provided those differences are based on a country’s economic and
demographic reality—only negates or reduces a country’s ability to benefit from participating in the global trade system. Such
“fairness” also prevents countries from realizing the tangible gains from freer trade: a more competitive economic environment and
better, more efficient domestic resource allocation. These positive effects drive greater long-term economic potential, create economic
opportunity, better promote a cleaner environment, and improve living standards at home. Free trade allows a county to compete in the
global market according to its fundamental economic strengths and to reap the productivity and efficiency gains that promote long-run
wealth and prosperity. In reality, there is no distinction between free trade and truly fair trade.
Free trade creates an incentive for environmental protection

Ebenezer T Bifubyeka Panos 12/17/05 “Free trade can damage the environment, WTO warned, 17 Dec,
http://www.panos.org.uk/global/tradingplaces_feature13.asp)
Daniel Mittler, a policy advisor for Greenpeace, says that forests and fisheries are all lined up for liberalisation as part of the
negotiations on NAMA. One outcome is that environmental rules, often the result of years of painstaking conservation work, could be
swept away, dismissed as barriers to trade. According to Mittler, free trade is speeding up the exploitation of natural resources much
faster than they can be regenerated. The threats to forests from trade liberalisation under the WTO would see them teeter on the brink
of extinction. Already 10 million hectares of forests in the world are vanishing every year, equivalent to a soccer pitch every two
seconds. However, some experts disagree. “We need to slay the myth that trade harms the environment,” says Julian Morris, director
of the International Policy Network (IPN). He says the Convention on the International Trade in Endangered Species (CITES), signed
in 1973, is predicated on the assumption that trade leads to the extinction of certain species such as the rhinoceros, whose horn is used
in southeast Asia for its medicinal properties. But, in spite of the CITES ban, the trade in rhino horn has not ceased, indicating that
illegal trading still exists. Rhino numbers have continued to decline everywhere except where rhinos are protected locally. In other
words, free trade is not the problem because illegal trade already exists - rather it is the lack of incentives to conserve. “By contrast, if
animals are subject to well-defined and enforced private property rights, then the people who own those rights will have an incentive
to protect the animals in order to maximise their economic value,” says Morris. “Trade in this case can increase the return on
investments in conservation by increasing the price paid for the products, thereby giving people an even stronger incentive to
conserve.” G. Andrew Work, executive director of The Lion Rock Institute, an advocate of free market values, says that while
analysing the benefits of trade liberalisation and subsidies, the Least Developed Countries should learn from developed countries.
“Britain produces everything. But its environment is cleaner now. There are more birds and tree-cover than there were 100 years ago,”
he says.
7
Free Trade Good
DDI 2008 KO
Sarah Ungureit
Environment
Expansion of trade directly leads to an improvement in environmental standards
Daniel Griswold, Associated Director of the Center for Trade Policy Studies at the CATO Institute, 9/00 “The
Blessings and Challenges of Globalization,” http://www.freetrade.org/pubs/articles/dg-9-1-00.html)
Some environmental activists complain that the global trading system, as embodied in the WTO, favors free trade at the expense of
environmental protection. But WTO rules place no restraints on the ability of a member government to impose any environmental
regulations determined to be necessary to protect its own environment from domestically produced or imported products. Article XX
of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade 1994, the basic charter of the WTO, plainly states that members may impose trade
restrictions "necessary to protect human, animal, or plant health." The Sanitary and Phytosanitary Agreement of the Uruguay Round
does require that such restrictions be based on sound scientific evidence--a commonsense requirement necessary to discourage the use
of health and safety issues as a cover for protectionism. If WTO members are found to be in violation of their commitments, they
remain free as sovereign nations to simply ignore any adverse WTO rulings against domestic regulations that impact trade. A
prominent example is the European Union's ban on the sale of beef from cattle treated with growth hormones. The EU has repeatedly
lost in the WTO, but it has no plans to lift its ban, even though it has produced no scientifically sound evidence that the banned beef
poses any hazard to public health. The United States retaliated against the EU in May 1999 by imposing sanctions on $ 117 million
worth of imports from Europe, but retaliation as a weapon of trade disputes existed long before the WTO. Antitrade environmental
activists complain that several decisions by the WTO have undercut U.S. environmental regulations. In the so-called Shrimp-Turtle
case, the WTO ruled against a U.S. ban on shrimp from countries the United States judged were not adequately protecting sea turtles
from being caught and killed in shrimp nets. In an earlier, similar case, the WTO had ruled against a U.S. ban on tuna from Mexico
that the United States claims was caught through a process that endangers dolphins. Environmental critics of the WTO point to these
two cases as proof of their claim. In both these cases, however, the United States remains free to simply ignore the WTO ruling and
continue enforcing the law as is. The affected nations could in theory retaliate with trade restrictions of their own if the United States
refuses to comply, but that option would always exist even if the WTO did not. And in the case of the Shrimp- Turtle decision, it was
not the law itself that ran afoul of WTO rules but the discriminatory way the United States went about implementing it, for example
giving Latin American suppliers more time than Asian suppliers to comply with the law. Expanding trade is not merely compatible
with high standards of environmental quality but can lead directly to their improvement. As a country sees its standard of living rise
through economic liberalization and trade expansion, its industry can more readily afford to control emissions and its citizens have
more to spend on the "luxury good" of improved environmental quality, above what they need for subsistence. And as economic
growth creates a growing, better- educated middle class, the political demand for pollution
8
Free Trade Good
DDI 2008 KO
Sarah Ungureit
Environment
Free trade key to biodiversity.
Daniel Griswold, Director of the Center of Trade Policy Studies,Stephen Slivinski, Director of Budget Studies,
and Christopher Preble, Director of Foreign Policy Studies 9/14/05 Cato Institute, “Ripe for Reform: Six Good
Reasons to Reduce US Farm Subsidies and Trade Barriers,” Trade Policy Analysis No. 30,
http://www.freetrade.org/node/31)
Farm protection also crowds out more environmentally friendly land use by artificially driving up land prices. A sizable share of the
increased income that protection and subsidies deliver to farms becomes “capitalized” through higher land values, because the
subsidies make the land more valuable by increasing the stream of income it can produce. Higher prices for farmland, in turn, render it
more expensive to acquire and maintain environmental preserves, riverside buffers, parkland, forests, or land for other uses that would
be more likely to preserve habitat and biodiversity.
Americans have witnessed that tradeoff firsthand during the past century. The shift of economic activity away from farming to
manufacturing and service industries has led to a reclaiming of farmland for other uses, including reforestation. The number of
forested acres in the northeastern United States increased dramatically in the last century, from 59.6 million acres in 1907 to 85.5
million by 1997—primarily because of the decline in the number of farms and farm acres in the region.39 By keeping marginal
farmland under cultivation, U.S. agricultural policies have slowed reforestation.
New Zealand has also experienced the same tradeoff of farmland for forests and other uses. After the government dramatically
reduced farm trade barriers and subsidies in the mid- 1980s, including subsidized irrigation, farmland values fell sharply. Although
that was painful in the short run for some farmers and related businesses, the lower land values allowed marginal land to return to such
uses as forestry and ecotourism. Since the liberation of agriculture from government control in New Zealand, “the use of fertilizer has
declined and there was a halt to land clearing and overstocking [over-grazing], which had been responsible for widespread soil
erosion.”
Free trade leads to higher environmental standards

Daniel Griswold, associate director of the Cato Institute's Center for Trade Policy Studies 01, Trade, Labor, and
the Environment: How Blue and Green Sanctions Threaten Higher Standards,
Progress on trade liberalization has been stymied by the current controversy over whether labor and environmental standards should
be enforced through trade sanctions. Advocates of sanctions insist that future trade agreements, including trade promotion authority,
contain such standards enforced by the threat of sanctions, but the use of sanctions would be counterproductive and would virtually
rule out future regional and multilateral trade agreements. The argument for "enforceable" labor and environmental standards is based
on the myth that nations are engaged in a regulatory "race to the bottom, but the evidence fails to support that thesis. Nations with low
standards do not gain a larger share of foreign direct investment or export markets. In fact, the large majority of the world's trade and
foreign investment flows between advanced, high-standard economies. In reality, openness to trade and investment promotes
development and higher incomes, which enable less developed countries to raise their labor and environmental standards. That
explains why nations that are open to the global economy enjoy the highest incomes and also maintain the highest labor and
environmental standards. Sanctions deprive poor countries of the international trade and investment opportunities they need to raise
overall living standards. Sanctions tend to strike at the very export industries in less-developed countries that typically pay the highest
wages and maintain the highest standards, forcing production and employment into less-globalized sectors where wages and standards
are almost always lower. Sanctions also damage America's economic interests by sabotaging regional and multilateral trade
negotiations. If the U.S. government wants to encourage higher labor and environmental standards abroad, its most important policy
should be to encourage free trade and investment flows so that low-standard countries can develop more rapidly.
9
Free Trade Good
DDI 2008 KO
Sarah Ungureit
Environment
Free trade key to environment
Sarah Fitzgerald, Trade policy analyst 8/1/01 “The Effects of NAFTA on Exports, Jobs, and the Environment:
Myth vs. Reality” Heritage Foundation, heritage.org)
Since NAFTA was implemented, Mexico has taken the initiative to pass environmental laws similar to those of the United States and
Canada. The North American Agreement on Environmental Cooperation (NAAEC), NAFTA's supplemental agreement on the
environment, promotes development through mutually supportive environmental and economic policies. It also created the
Commission for Environmental Cooperation (CEC) to protect, conserve, and improve the environment. The NAFTA agreements also
created the Border Environment Cooperation Commission (BECC) and the North American Development Bank (NADB). The BECC
assists border communities in addressing environmental concerns and certifies environmental projects. The NADB uses private and
public funding to finance BECC projects. According to the U.S. Department of Commerce, since the NADB's establishment in 1995,
it "has approved a total of $105 million in loans, guarantees, [and] grants to help finance 14 environmental projects benefiting over
four million residents on both sides of the [U.S.-Mexico] border." As a result of one BECC-NADB project in the Lower Valley of El
Paso, Texas, 2,600 households will be connected to a wastewater treatment system this year, according to the Office of the U.S. Trade
Representative.
Free trade increases social standards and concern for the environment
CATO Institute, 06 (Concern for Trade Policy Studies 2006 http://www.freetrade.org/faqs/faqs.html#one
While this is a frequently heard complaint, there is no evidence of such a “race to the bottom.” In fact, the opposite is true: expanding
trade and rising incomes tend to promote higher social standards. As incomes rise in developing countries, their people and
governments are able to devote more resources to protecting the environment and lifting labor standards, while an expanding middle
class begins to expect and demand improvements in the environment and working conditions. Empirical evidence shows that as
nations reach middle and upper income levels, their environmental policies and indicators improve. Working conditions also improve
and rates of child labor fall. Foreign investment in developing countries contributes to this “race to the top” by creating better paying
jobs and by “importing” better business practices and work rules. Contrary to the “race to the bottom” myth, low wages and lax
environmental rules are not an irresistible magnet for foreign investment. Foreign investors seek property rights protection, a
functioning legal system, a well-educated workforce, profitable markets, and sufficient infrastructure. That is why most of the world’s
foreign investment flows between rich, high-standard economies.
10
Free Trade Good
DDI 2008 KO
Sarah Ungureit
Environment
Growth brought by free trade is key to demand and implementation of greater
environmental protections
Ana Eiras Economic Policy Analyst for Latin American and Brett Schaefer Fellow in International
Regulatory Affairs at the Heritage Foundation 9/27/01 “Trade: The Best Way to Protect the Environment,”
Backgrounder 1489, 27 Sep, http://www.heritage.org/Research/TradeandForeignAid/BG1480.cfm)
The key to increasing environmental protection in developing nations is to increase economic growth. As a country's standard of living
rises through economic liberalization and trade expansion, its industry can more readily afford to control emissions and its citizens
have more discretionary income to allocate toward improved environmental quality. Free trade is a central component in
increasing economic growth. By opening markets and creating more business opportunities, free trade fosters
economic growth by rewarding "risk taking by increasing sales, profit margins, and market share. Companies can choose to build on
those profits by expanding their operations, entering new market sectors, and creating better-paying jobs." 3 Full liberalization of the
economy, beginning with an open trade policy, is the most effective environmental preservation strategy because economic
liberalization, including free trade, leads directly to increased economic growth. Specifically, the evidence demonstrates that: *
Wealthier societies are more likely to demand and implement greater environmental protection because they can
better afford the costs of those policies. Wealthier societies not only are better able to afford environmental protection,
but also show a proven desire for such protection that increases as income grows. 4 This relationship is supported by
extensive evidence published by the National Bureau of Economic Research. Gene M. Grossman and Alan B. Krueger, for example,
concluded that pollution appears to rise with GDP at low levels of income, but eventually to reach a peak, and then to fall with GDP at
higher levels of income....We find that economic growth brings an initial phase of deterioration followed by a subsequent phase of
improvement. 5 Moreover, the United States is an example of the elasticity of spending for environmental protection. As incomes
have risen over the past three decades, America has increased "real spending by government and business on the environment and
natural resource protection has doubled." 6 * Economically free countries typically have a more sustainable environmental
policy. In January 2001, the World Economic Forum, the Center for International Earth Science Information Network (CIESIN), and
the Yale Center for Environmental Law and Policy published an Environmental Sustainability Index (ESI). 7 The Index assigns the
health of a country's environment a single number ranging from 0 to 100, in which zero means low sustainability and 100 means high
sustainability. This number represents a country's success in coping with environmental challenges and cooperating with other
countries in the management and improvement of common environmental problems. Chart 1 illustrates the relationship between The
Heritage Foundation/Wall Street Journal 2001 Index of Economic Freedom scores and the ESI. The chart shows a strong relationship
between economic freedom and environmental sustainability. The freer the economy, the greater the level of environmental
sustainability. The United States is a classic example of economic freedom's beneficial impact on the environment. America has been a
champion of economic freedom for decades while simultaneously maintaining one of the world's cleanest environments. * Countries
with more open trade and investment policies generally have higher levels of environmental sustainability. Free trade
and the investment that typically follows it are two important sources of economic growth. Therefore, an open trade policy and a
business-friendly environment will not only increase growth, but also provide the means to protect the environment.
Free trade good for the environment

BBC news, 2/12/03, “The argument for free trade” http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/533208.stm
Free trade enables people to sell their products to those who are willing to pay the highest price for them. That means the original
producer is able to capture a larger proportion of the value of the product. In this sense free trade is fair trade. Good for the
environment Free trade also enables production to occur in places where it is most environmentally appropriate. For similar reasons,
most aluminium is produced in places where there is abundant hydroelectric power, which is less resource intensive than gas or coal.
Thus the gains from trade are environmental as well as economic.
11
Free Trade Good
DDI 2008 KO
Sarah Ungureit
increases productivity
Free trade leads to higher productivity
James Langenfeld, a director at LECG, an economics and finance consulting firm, and an adjunct professor at
Loyola University Law School and James Nieberding, a senior managing economist in LECG, 7/05 “The
benefits of free trade to U.S. consumers: quantitative confirmation of theoretical expectation”
http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1094/is_3_40/ai_n15346619
Economists dating back to David Hume (1752), Adam Smith (1776), and David Ricardo (1817) have recognized that free markets and
free trade can be a key source of economic prosperity and promote the efficient use of an economy's resources. These insights, and the
analyses based on them, argue that there are gains from free trade due to increased specialization and comparative advantage. That is,
trade allows nations to increase their overall productivity by shifting capital and other resources to sectors of their economy where
they are more productive relative to other sectors. Such international specialization leads countries that trade to higher productivity
and higher living standards than if they did not trade.
Free Trade results in higher productivity

The U.S. economy has become increasingly open to trade. As illustrated in Figure 2, the value of U.S. imports and exports relative to
U.S. GDP has increased over time in real terms for the period 1959-2002. As exports and imports have risen over time, GDP has also
increased roughly in parallel with the trade increases. There are many reasons for the growth in U.S. real GDP over time. However,
research indicates that increased trade has contributed substantially to U.S. growth, and we use that research as one method to quantify
how much free trade has added to the income of the average U.S. household. Research firmly establishes a link between a country's
increased trade and economic well-being. The IMF (2002, p. 132) concludes, "[the] evidence indicates that trade openness makes an
important contribution to higher productivity and income per capita, and that trade liberalization contributes to growth." (6) Similar
findings have been developed by the U.S. International Trade Commission (USITC, 2003, pp 67 and 113 and Chapter 4) and the
World Bank (2004).
12
Free Trade Good
DDI 2008 KO
Sarah Ungureit
US Leadership
Free trade key to US soft power – US leadership on trade is critical.

Daniel Griswold, Director of the Center of Trade Policy Studies, Stephen Slivinski, Director of Budget Studies
and Christopher Preble, Director of Foreign Policy Studies 9/14/05 Cato Institute, “Ripe for Reform: Six Good
Reasons to Reduce US Farm Subsidies and Trade Barriers,” Trade Policy Analysis No. 30, September 14,
A sixth reason for fundamental reform of farm policy lies beyond our borders. The elimination of U.S. agriculture tariffs, quotas, and
subsidies would create a more hospitable climate abroad for U.S. foreign policy and would improve and enhance U.S. security.
Equally important, the repeal of those policies would be consistent with the long-standing American belief in the value of economic
opportunity for all. By eliminating policies that are widely resented around the globe, the United States would set the example for
other developed countries, which exercise an even greater influence over their agricultural sectors. Although advocates of the current
market distorting agricultural policies do not seek to cause harm to others, the collective effect of U.S. farm policies is to lower the
price of agricultural products worldwide. Those policies might provide modest short-term benefits for farmers in developed countries,
but at the cost of depressed global prices for agricultural products that exacerbate poverty in those areas around the globe, such as
Sub-Saharan Africa and Central Asia, where people are heavily dependent on agriculture.
Free trade is vital to us leadership

Robert D. Hormats, Vice Chairman, Goldman Sachs International, 6/20/01 “American Trade Policy: The
Importance of Trade Promotion Authority,” Testimony Before the Committee on Finance, United Staes Senate,
http://www.senate.gov/~finance/062001rhtest.pdf
Expanding global trade and investment over the last 50 years have provided enormous benefits for American workers, farmers,
consumers and, businesses. We tend to take it for granted today, but this experience is in sharp contrast to the horrible economic mess
the US and world got themselves into after World War I — when American leadership faltered. Protectionist measures and
international financial instability were among the major factors that led to the Depression. We should not forget the lessons of this
period — nor let our leadership of the global economy be derailed by internal divisions or by complacency that the world economy
will work just fine whether the US is an effective leader or not! Nor should we let the current weakness in the US economy and the
world economy block progress. Trade liberalization can provide a boost to growth. Reduction in many kinds of trade barriers is
equivalent to a stimulative tax cut. Access to growing foreign markets has been a vital factor in America’s economic growth for
several decades, especially for our most productive sectors, such as high technology, agriculture, high value added manufactured
goods, entertainment and financial services. And competitive imports have reinforced the dynamism of our economy, while
broadening consumer choice, and holding down the prices of many products, to the benefit of millions of households. Chairman
Greenspan made this point eloquently in testimony before this committee earlier this year. US leadership in promoting trade
liberalization has been essential to secure these benefits for the American people. It also has been vital to this country’s ability to
remain a strong and effective leader on global political and security matters for the last 50 plus years. If we now turn our back on
global trade leadership we will weaken our global political leadership as well. In recent years advocates of open, rules-based,
transparent and nondiscriminatory trade — and supporters of American leadership in the world economy — have been on the
defensive. The benefits of expanding trade and investment are too often neglected, while vocal criticism of US trade policy, the WTO
and globalization tend to get more visibility and public attention. The role of a strong global economy in maintaining a strong
American economy is too often ignored.
13
Free Trade Good
DDI 2008 KO
Sarah Ungureit
US Leadership
Free trade is key to u.s. global leadership

Robert D. Hormats, Vice Chairman, Goldman Sachs International, 6/20/01 “American Trade Policy: The
Importance of Trade Promotion Authority,” Testimony Before the Committee on Finance, United Staes Senate,
http://www.senate.gov/~finance/062001rhtest.pdf
Expanded global trade and investment over the last 50 years have provided enormous benefits for American workers, consumers and,
businesses. We tend to take it for granted today, but this experience is in sharp contrast to the horrible economic mess the US and
world got themselves into after World War I -- when American leadership faltered. Protectionist measures and international financial
instability were among the major factors that led to the depression. We should not forget the lessons of this period -- or let our
leadership of the global economy be derailed by internal divisions or complacency that the world economy will work just fine whether
the US is an effective leader or not! Access to growing foreign markets was a vital factor in America's economic growth in the 1990s,
especially for its most productive sectors such as high technology, agriculture, entertainment and financial services. And competitive
imports have reinforced the dynamism of our economy and broadened consumer choice, holding down the prices of many products to
the benefit of millions of households. America's leadership in promoting trade liberalization and a robust global economic system have
been essential to secure these benefits for the American people and to this country's ability to remain a strong and effective leader on
global political and security matters for the last 50 plus years. However, in recent years advocates of open, rules-based, transparent
and non-discriminatory trade -- and supporters of American leadership in the world economy -- have been on the defensive. The
benefits of expanding trade are too often neglected while vocal criticism of US trade policy, the WTO and globalization tend to get
more attention. The role of a strong global economy in maintaining a strong American economy is too often ignored. It is now a matter
of great urgency to present more forcefully, and to a broader range of our citizens, the very compelling case that exists for sustaining
freer trade and investment and for the extension of market-oriented rules to a broader range of countries and sectors. It is also time to
explain in clear terms to the American people that the central international economic institutions, while far from perfect, are important
to the sound structure of the global economy. And it is critical at this moment to recognize that by sitting on the sidelines while other
countries negotiate their own preferential bilateral and regional trade agreements, the US is doing considerable damage to its
economic interests and to its position as global leader.
14
Free Trade Good
DDI 2008 KO
Sarah Ungureit
Creates Jobs
Free Trade creates jobs
Yet the post-World War II American consensus for openness is under unprecedented attack. Many Americans are anxious because the
pace of economic change has accelerated. Rather than confronting this fear and offering solutions, some political leaders and pundits
are pandering to it. Turn on the television to watch nightly predictions of America’s decline, blamed chiefly on imports and
immigrants. Technology affects far more jobs than does trade or migration. Try to remember the last time you went to a bank teller
instead of an ATM or asked an operator to put through a call instead of picking up your mobile. But no unions mount lobbying
campaigns against ATMs; no politicians call for a timeout on the sale of cell phones. Especially in an election year, it is much easier to
attack NAFTA, blame China or oppose trade agreements like the ones with Korea and Colombia. Left unsaid is that the open and
dynamic U.S. economy has added more than 26 million jobs since 1993, more than all other major industrialized countries combined.
Advocating economic isolationism as a panacea for economic anxiety is wrong and dangerous. Because overt protectionism has such a
checkered history, some leaders in Congress recently have adopted a less direct but no less ruinous approach. Rather than resolutely
defend openness, they say they would support trade agreements such as the ones with South Korea and Colombia “if only” — and
then recite a list of ever-changing conditions that always put success just out of reach. Delay carries costs, because the world is not
standing still. Colombia recently inked a trade deal with Canada, which means wheat from Manitoba will soon displace wheat from
Montana in one of the fastest-growing markets in Latin America. Korea is busy negotiating trade agreements with Europe and Canada
and is even looking to expand trade with China. At a time when U.S. exports are helping to cushion the effects of a downturn in the
domestic housing market, pending trade agreements would further boost overseas sales. If closing oneself off from the global
economy were the path to prosperity, North Korea would be the richest country on Earth. Being open to foreign products, capital,
ideas and people makes the United States uniquely dynamic and strong. More than that, openness is part of who we are as a people —
a core element of the American creed. Even in this political season, surely that is something worth defending.
Free trade creates jobs

The gains from freer trade are substantial. Today, the $12 trillion U.S. economy is bolstered by free trade, a pillar of America’s vitality.
In 2005, U.S. exports to the rest of the world totaled $1.2 trillion and supported one in five U.S. manufacturing jobs. Jobs directly
linked to the export of goods pay 13 percent to 18 percent more than other U.S. jobs.1 Moreover, agricultural exports hit a record high
in 2005 and now account for 926,000 jobs.2 In Colorado, international trade supports one of every 20 private-sector jobs and more
than 16 percent of manufacturing jobs. International trade supports an estimated 6.1 percent of Ohio’s total private-sector employment
and more than 20 percent of all manufacturing jobs. In South Carolina, trade supports one of every 10 private-sector jobs and more
than 23 percent of manufacturing jobs.3 State by state across America, international trade promotes opportunity. The service sector
accounts for roughly 79 percent of the U.S. economy and 30 percent of the value of American exports.4 Service industries account for
eight out of every 10 jobs in the U.S. and provide more jobs than the rest of the economy combined. Over the past 20 years, service
industries have contributed about 40 million new jobs across America.5
15
Free Trade Good
DDI 2008 KO
Sarah Ungureit
Creates Jobs
Trade empirically doesn’t hurt blue collar jobs—it creates new opportunities for Americans.
Opponents of free trade fear that efforts to remove protectionist barriers to foreign competition will result in the loss of bluecollar jobs
in America, especially in the manufacturing sector. They believe that the North American Free Trade Agreement in particular threatens
these jobs. Yet, as Chart 1 (page 5) shows, the facts belie this fear. The nature of employment in the United States is indeed evolving
away from manufacturing and toward more service-oriented and high-technology jobs. However, the record shows that trading freely
with America's NAFTA partners, Canada and Mexico, has not resulted in an aggregate loss of manufacturing jobs. Instead, since 1994:
* 14 million new American jobs have been reported; * The unemployment rate in America has fallen from 6 percent to 3.9 percent (as
of April 2000); and * The number of manufacturing jobs in America has remained steady, employing 18.3 million people in 1994 and
18.4 million in 1999, which represents 14 percent of the total American workforce.11 On balance, not only has NAFTA not resulted in
a loss of factory jobs in the United States, but it has not led to a loss in real wages for manufacturing workers. The average real wage
in the manufacturing sector rose from $8.03 per hour in 1994 to $8.26 per hour in 1999 (in constant inflation-adjusted dollars).12
Moreover, saving just one job in America's declining apparel and textile industry is estimated to cost the taxpayers more than
$100,000 each year.13 The workforce in this sector, which has declined by approximately 30 percent since 1989, comprises just 1
percent of total non-farm employment. The decline is a natural outcome, considering that the industry pays far less than the average
national wage--nearly 20 percent less in textiles and 33 percent less in apparel.14 Such lower-paying jobs become marginal as workers
move to better-paying jobs in the broader market. In fact, over the past decade, 19 million more jobs have become available,15
demonstrating that there are many opportunities for American workers to find jobs.
16
Free Trade Good
DDI 2008 KO
Sarah Ungureit
Increases Competition
Free trade increases competition and efficiency

The Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (1998, pp. 10 and 39) finds that nations relatively open to trade have
achieved double the annual average growth as those that are relatively closed, and states "the efficiency benefits of an open trade and
investment regime contribute to economic growth and hence rising incomes." The 2003 Economic Report of the President (CEA,
2003. pp. 231-233 and 242) summarizes the findings of a study of developing countries between income growth and openness to
trade. It finds that had the average "globalizer" country and the average "nonglobalizer" country each begun with an income per capita
of $1,000 in 1980, by 2000 the globalizer's income per capita would have grown to $2,300 and the nonglobalizer's only to $1,240.
This publication also states, In short, international competition provides incentives to increase efficiency and productivity, leading
in turn to higher income per capita ... Research suggests that a 1 percent increase in a country's trade relative to its GDP is
associated with an increase in its income per capita of 3 percent. Moreover, evidence suggests that it is increased trade that leads
to increased income rather than the reverse.
Free trade fosters competition and leads to efficiency

Free trade fosters competition and encourages efficient use of resources, which lowers prices, enhances variety, and improves product
quality for those goods demanded by consumers. As a result of increased competition, free trade spurs innovation and efficiency on
the part of domestic firms. Freer trade reduces the costs of domestic producers by reducing the costs of imported inputs, thus reducing
prices of finished goods and services. According to the 2003 Economic Report of the President (CEA, 2003, p. 231), trade
liberalization ... brings greater specialization according to comparative advantage, lower prices, and a wider selection of products
and services for both consumers and firms. Openness to trade allows exporters to sell their output in a larger market; workers in
export industries benefit as the resulting higher prices for the goods they make translate into higher wages and incomes.
17
Free Trade Good
DDI 2008 KO
Sarah Ungureit
Increases Competition
Openness to trade is key to innovation

There have always been defeatists who believe that America cannot compete. Twenty years ago, it was widely believed that Japan
would overtake the United States to become the world’s pre-eminent economy. In Japanese investment in Rockefeller Center and
Pebble Beach, many saw the inexorable decline of America. But reality intervened. The United States kept growing, and today
millions of Americans have good jobs at foreign firms that chose to invest in their country. Meanwhile, Japan suffered economic
stagnation for more than a decade. Despite new competitive challenges, the United States continues to grow and innovate and remains
the largest economy in the world. The secret ingredient in America’s national recipe? Openness. The United States is stronger as a
nation because it welcomes the world’s products, investment, ideas and people. In Japan, China and elsewhere, economies are less
open and therefore less nimble. In America, openness to trade provides access to the world’s products at affordable prices, keeps firms
on their toes, competitively speaking, and creates new markets for exports. Openness to foreign investment capital creates jobs and
provides the lubricating oil for the American economic engine. Receptivity to foreign ideas, students and scientists makes the United
States a global hub for innovation. And America is continuously renewed and refreshed by immigrant entrepreneurs.
Free trade fosters competition and innovation, which helps economies and produces new technologies.
Economics at The Heritage Foundation,
5/24/04. “Why America Needs to Support Free Trade”, The Heritage Foundation,
http://www.heritage.org/Research/TradeandForeignAid/bg1761.cfm
Innovation is the basis of progress, and competition is the best incentive to innovate. The challenge of having others producing similar
products or offering similar services motivates businesses to find new technologies and better ways to provide what they produce. The
need to remain competitive forces businesses to strive constantly to innovate. As a result, new technologies are born. America is
perhaps the world's best example of how competition fosters innovation. Although at times the United States has become somewhat
protectionist, its economy has been built primarily on the principles of a free market, private enterprise, and competition. In such a
competitive environment, new technologies, from computers to medicines to machinery, have helped the economy to become
increasingly more productive per unit of labor and machinery employed in the production process. Since 1948, according to the
Bureau of Labor Statistics, multifactor productivity--a ratio of output to combined inputs--in the U.S. private business sector has more
than doubled.2 (See Chart 1.) Productivity has fostered economic growth and, by lowering production costs, has given ordinary
Americans the opportunity to raise their standard of living.
18
Free Trade Good
DDI 2008 KO
Sarah Ungureit
Promotes Peace
Free trade promotes world peace.

Daniel T. Griswold, Director of the Center of Trade Policy Studies at the Cato Institute 6/20/03 “Capitol Hill
Forum: Can Free Trade Promote Peace in the Middle East?,” http://www.freetrade.org/pubs/speeches/dg-
062003.htm)
After World War Two, Democratic and Republican administrations alike pursued trade expansion as an important pillar of America's
Cold-War policy. Trade promoted development in post-war Europe and Japan, and cemented relations among allies. War is pretty
much unthinkable today among the major powers of Europe in part because of the trade and investment ties that bind their people
together. September 11 and its aftermath have reminded us again that trade and foreign policy are intertwined. That connection
between trade, security, and foreign policy will dominate the agenda at this weekend's historic economic forum in Amman, Jordan,
which will hear more about in a few minutes. Free trade is not a panacea, but it is a necessary building block for a more peaceful and
prosperous Middle East. Free trade has helped to reduce poverty in those countries and regions of the world that have progressively
opened themselves to the global economy. Free trade can till the soil for democracy and respect for human rights by creating an
economically independent and growing middle class.
Free trade fosters cooperation between nations, leading to global peace.

Economics at The Heritage Foundation, 5/14/04. “Why America Needs to Support Free Trade” The Heritage
Foundation, http://www.heritage.org/Research/TradeandForeignAid/bg1761.cfm.
Free trade fosters an enormous chain of economic activity, the benefits of which culminate in a social desire to be at peace with
neighboring and even faraway nations with which trade is conducted or might be conducted in the future. When individuals see how
beneficial it is to live in an economically free society; when they see how freedom allows them to improve their lives and those of
their families; when they can create new businesses, engage in commerce, or work for a decent salary or wage, adding dignity to their
lives, they want peace to preserve all these good things. By contrast, when people live under economic oppression and are at the
mercy of a small ruling authority that dictates every aspect of their lives and limits their ability to realize their potential, they resent the
life they have and learn to hate better lives elsewhere. If they cannot enjoy the fruits of their efforts and cannot realize their potential;
if they cannot feel free to do business, work freely, and trade freely; if they do not have anything to gain or to lose, they begin to feel
that any change--even war--might be better. They have no incentive to desire peace with their neighbors. For this reason, the areas of
greatest conflict in the world also happen to be those that are economically repressed. (See Map.) The Economic Freedom Map, drawn
annually from the Index, shows, for example, that countries that are the most economically repressed have also suffered civil wars and
unrest. * The areas of the Middle East in which civil wars and terrorist havens abound are both economically repressed and mostly
unfree. * North Korea, a country plagued by starvation and poverty, is repressed. * Brazil, Argentina, parts of Africa, and some former
Soviet republics--all mostly unfree--have high levels of poverty and periodically suffer political and economic crises. Free trade and
economic freedom set the process of growth, innovation, and prosperity in motion. In that process, individuals support the creation of
institutions that are conducive to growth and that preserve peace and prosperity. The greater the level of prosperity, the greater the
likelihood of peace.
19
Free Trade Good
DDI 2008 KO
Sarah Ungureit
Promotes Peace
Free Trade promotes peace
Dr. Gerald P. O'Driscoll, Jr., former Director of, and Sarah Fitzgerald, is a Trade Policy Analyst in, the Center
for International Trade and Economics at The Heritage Foundation, Dec 18 2002, "Trade Promotes Prosperity
and Security" http://www.heritage.org/Research/TradeandForeignAid/BG1617.cfm
After the Cold War, "the U.S. promotion of democracy and American values worldwide, facilitated by communication advances, was
linked to free trade, American economic prosperity, global stability, and thereby U.S. national security."3 The Administration's recent
white paper elaborates on this concept, identifying "free markets and free trade" as key to a secure America and a major component of
the national security strategy.4 Economists have long recognized that free markets and free trade are the source of economic
prosperity; but as President Bush has noted, democracy and economic openness are also "the best foundations for domestic stability
and international order."5 The fact is that allies and trading partners are more likely to resolve differences than to resort to armed
conflict. "For example," write Edward Mansfield of the University of Pennsylvania and Jon Pevehouse of the University of Wisconsin,
"in a seminal study on this topic, Solomon W. Polachek (1980) analyzed 30 pairs of countries from 1958 to 1967 and found that higher
levels of trade dampen conflict."6 Mansfield and Pevehouse also show that trade agreements dampen conflict because such hostilities
threaten the very economic benefits that states expect to achieve and are achieving from the agreements.7 The free exchange of goods
builds wealth and prosperity for all concerned.
20
Free Trade Good
DDI 2008 KO
Sarah Ungureit
Prevents War
Free trade will prevent war
Jason Brooks, Dept. of Journalism at Carleton University 2000 “Make Trade, Not War,” Second prize winner of
the Garvey essay contest, http://www.independent.org/students/garvey/essay.asp?id=1456)
Free trade is, in one sense, like a nuclear weapon. Which seems strange to say because trade is associated with peace and prosperity,
while nuclear weapons are synonymous with apocalypse and terror. But here is how they are alike: they both prevent war by making it
more costly. A strong argument exists that the only reason the Cold War never got “hot” between the United States and the Soviet
Union was that nuclear weapons made outright conflict unthinkable. Trade, in a similar way, binds the fortunes of people in the world
together. It is the best assurance of peace. By forging bonds between customers and suppliers around the world, trade gives citizens a
vested interest in the wellbeing of people in other countries—war becomes a matter of mutual assured destruction, if you will. With
trade, a war abroad will have fallout at home. But while trade has the deterrent effects of powerful weapons, is far preferable because
of its other advantages. Where weapons are expensive, free trade brings prosperity and freedom. Where weapons bring terror, free
trade fosters harmony and encourages people to resolve disputes without violence. Richard Cobden, a nineteenth century British
industrialist and politician, often argued in favor of trade over armaments to discourage war. His recipe for peace remains as true today
as it was more than 150 years ago: “The more any nation traffics abroad upon free and honest principles, the less it will be in danger
of wars.” Free trade is indeed the wellspring of peace. What is trade? It is the natural, voluntary interaction of people for mutual
benefit. Trade does not require force. American economist Henry George writes, “Free trade consists simply in letting people buy and
sell as they want to buy and sell. It is protection that requires force, for it consists in preventing people from doing what they want to
do.” In order to set up an argument linking free trade to peace, it is useful to first look at the incentives inherent to a world where
borders are shut by governments. In such a world the incentive is for war. First of all, protectionism puts a government in conflict with
its own people. Consider: In wartime, nations punish their enemies by blockade or trade sanctions. Where a government pursues a
protectionist policy, it essentially commits an act of war on its own people. This would be bad enough if the harm inflicted ended with
its own citizens, but it doesn’t. A protectionist government harms, in addition to its own people, all citizens of the world who wanted
to trade with the besieged. It follows that any government imposing protectionism puts itself in conflict with citizens of many nations.
The harmful effects of one protectionist policy circle the world like shock waves. “If a national government hinders the most
productive use of its country’s resources, it hurts the interests of all other nations,” writes Ludwig von Mises. “The economic
backwardness of a country with rich natural resources injures all those whose conditions could be improved by a more efficient
exploitation of this natural wealth.” What is the resulting incentive for the harmed citizens of the world? Mises gives us the answer.
“This economic nationalism must result in war whenever those injured believe that they are strong enough to brush away by armed
violent action the measures detrimental to their own welfare.” Protectionism encourages war—and this is a very important point to be
made. It encourages countries to make war on the protectionists and it encourages, perhaps most of all, the protectionists to make war
on everyone else. That protectionism leads to war becomes obvious if we consider that citizens may, fundamentally, acquire goods
from abroad in only one of two ways: trade or conquest. When voluntary exchange is made impossible by artificial restrictions
imposed by governments, the only other way nations may access foreign markets is by force. A country insisting on self-sufficiency
will have to choose between shortages or war. The reason is clear: around the world, concentrations of population do not in general
correlate with the distribution of natural resources, such as wheat, oil, or technical expertise. In a world of protectionism, countries
will not have access to resources unless those resources lie within its national boundaries. It is this basic problem with protectionism
that makes extending national boundaries, and ultimately war, so appealing. Resource shortages caused by protection have been a
problem in Europe for centuries. Mises observes that it was a problem in particular for Germany. “The Germans tried—in vain—to
solve it by war and conquest.” Protectionism makes war profitable. But the solution to this perverted state of incentives is simple: free
trade. Where borders are open it makes no material difference to the citizens how far national boundaries stretch. Goods and services
will still flow freely. Citizens can migrate and sell their labor anywhere when borders are open. To paraphrase Ayn Rand, a
protectionist country survives by looting; a free country survives through production and trade.
21
Free Trade Good
DDI 2008 KO
Sarah Ungureit
Spreads Democracy
Free trade creates democracies
Jason Brooks, Dept. of Journalism at Carleton University 2000 “Make Trade, Not War,” Second prize winner of
the Garvey essay contest, http://www.independent.org/students/garvey/essay.asp?id=1456)
It has been written time and again that the common folk don’t make war—it is the kings, politicians and autocrats who wage war at the
expense of the people. If so, trade is a solution to war. First, in contrast with protectionism, trade makes war more costly to the
common people. Citizens of democracies will be less likely to vote for leaders who wage war. Second, free trade tends to undermine
autarky. It spreads liberty and helps create new democracies, thus empowering those citizens to whom war is most costly. In a
democracy, common people, not the rulers, ultimately make the country’s choices through the votes they cast. This helps explain why
democracies are less likely than autocracies to wage aggressive wars. Historian Spencer Weart, in Never at War, states boldly that
“Well-established democracies have never made war on one another.” While a few exceptions are possible depending on your
definition of a well-established democracy, it is a powerful statement that, in general, holds. Evidence is all around us. Wars between
Canada and the United States, Britain and France or any other of a few dozen democracies that come to mind are unthinkable.
Rudolph Rummel, in Power Kills, arrives at similar conclusions, adding “the more a nation is democratic, the less severe its overall
foreign violence.” One explanation why democracies don’t fight each other, first suggested by Immanuel Kant, is that citizens reject
war because it costs too much. Wars are destructive, people are forced to fight and die, and both victor and vanquished are burdened
with war debts after the peace is signed. Free trade makes war less likely for democracies because it adds to the costs of war for the
majority of citizens who elect their leaders. The more a country trades abroad, the more its consumers will depend on imports, and the
more domestic jobs will depend on exports. By giving majorities of people a material self-interest in peace, war is discouraged. Under
current rules of trade, for instance, we can be sure the United States will never wage war on Japan. We can be sure of this if for no
other reason than that Americans like to watch their wars on TV—and the Japanese make the TVs. Of course, there are a million other
ties that would prevent these countries from fighting—from the trade in automobiles to cross-ownership of capital in thousands of
industries. Yet an argument could still be made that common citizens of democracies do like some wars—perhaps because war means
more programming choices in prime time or because it boosts national pride. Adam Smith raised this possibility, writing at a time of
great protection, in 1776. For some people the amusement from reading about the war in the newspapers “compensates the small
difference between the taxes which they pay on account of the war, and those which they had been accustomed to pay in time of
peace.” While this may be true, we must remember that taxes are a relatively small price of wars, particularly when trade between two
warring nations is extensive. It seems that if citizens were wont to support wars for their entertainment value this would apply far
more readily to countries with which trade is minimal. Where trade links are strong, war threatens citizens with much lower living
standards—for many reasons. One interesting argument given the interest in the stock market by a broad base of society in recent
years is that with free flows of capital, anyone who holds stocks or mutual funds will likely have investments abroad. These
investments are often in foreign companies or in companies that conduct substantial amounts of business abroad. The more we have
free trade, the more citizens of a warring nation must worry that a missile launched from home will ultimately impact on their own
investments abroad—and their pocketbooks at home. Free trade, because it makes war costly, is the greatest guarantor of peace
because it turns concern for ourselves into concern for others. The more a nation trades, the more going to war with another country
becomes indistinguishable from going to war with oneself.
22
Free Trade Good
DDI 2008 KO
Sarah Ungureit
Spreads Democracy
Free trade spreads democracy globally.

Free trade fosters support for the rule of law. Companies that engage in international trade have reason to abide by the terms of their
contracts and international agreed-upon norms and laws. The World Trade Organization, for example, compels its member countries to
honor trade agreements and, in any trade dispute, to abide by the decisions of the WTO's mediating body. By supporting the rule of
law, free trade also can reduce the opportunities for corruption. In countries where contracts are not enforced, business relationships
fail, foreign investors flee, and capital stays away. It is a downward spiral that especially hinders economic development in countries
where official corruption is widespread. As Alejandro Chafuen, President of the Atlas Economic Research Foundation, has noted,
"True economic freedom is possible only under a system of limited government with a strong rule of law. Economic freedom has little
value if corruption in government means that only a few will enjoy it."19 Trade likewise can falter quickly in countries where customs
officials expect kickbacks at every checkpoint. In Western Africa, customs officials can stop trucks carrying goods as often as every
hundred yards just to collect another bribe, as Mabousso Thiam, executive secretary of the West African Enterprise Network, testified
at a 1999 Organisation for Economic Co-Operation and Development (OECD) conference on corruption.20 Such arbitrary
checkpoints spring up when countries cannot pay their customs officials livable wages, forcing them to choose between remaining
honest but failing to bring home enough money to feed their families or taking an illegal bribe, as others often do. As U.N. Secretary
General Kofi Annan has observed, Corruption is built on everything being in the hands of the government. So for everything you
want, you need a permit. The person who gives you the permit wants a bribe. The person who's going to make the appointment for you
wants a bribe. And so on.21 Free trade, reinforced by the rule of law, removes such incentives for corruption by spurring economic
growth, increasing the number of better-paying jobs, and ultimately increasing the level of prosperity. But free trade transmits more
than just physical goods or services to people. It also transmits ideas and values. A culture of freedom can flourish whenever a great
society, as 18th century economist Adam Smith termed it, emerges with the self-confidence to open itself to an inflow of goods and
the ideas and practices accompanying them. A culture of freedom can become both the cornerstone and capstone of economic
prosperity.
Free trade empowers individuals and promotes democratic values

Charles Grassley, Senator (R—IA) and Chairman of the Senate Finance committee, 7/14/04 (Charles, Remarks
on receiving the Cordell Hull Award, “Seven Principles of US Trade Policy,”
http://grassley.senate.gov/releases/2004/p04r07-15.htm)
Fourth, free trade promotes freedom. Free trade empowers individuals, not governments. There are few individual freedoms more
important than the freedom to buy, sell and create. Free trade helps to break down government control over resources and frees
consumers and businesses to make their own choices. Why should a small group of political leaders decide what individuals can buy
and sell? Government control over trade empowers the state over the individual. It creates an environment in which non-transparent
bureaucracies set the terms of trade, leading to arbitrary rules and unfair results. What government does for trade policy is nothing
compared to what individual businessmen can accomplish. The individual business owner is the backbone of international trade. My
job as a government official should be to promote fair and transparent rules, not to decide winners and losers. Fifth, free trade
promotes democratic values. An open international trading system promotes bilateral and multilateral consultation and cooperation. It
creates a framework for addressing and settling commercial disputes peacefully. It encourages procedural and substantive due process,
administrative and judicial review, transparency, and the rule of law. Each of these fundamental features of a liberal trading system
reflects fundamental American values. They are essential features of a democratic society, and they lead to higher growth and
development, allowing governments to better address the basic needs of their citizens. History has shown that protectionists and
economic isolationists have not protected the environment, nor effectively addressed poverty, working conditions or worker rights –
because many citizens are unable to find a job when an economy is protected by high tariff barriers and non-transparent and corrupt
regulatory regimes.
23
Free Trade Good
DDI 2008 KO
Sarah Ungureit
Spreads Democracy
Free trade encourages basic human rights and representative government

Daniel Griswold, Associated Director of the Center for Trade Policy Studies at the CATO Institute in
Washington, 5/1/02 “seven Moral Arguments for Free Trade,” The Insider,
http://www.insideronline.org/feature.cfm?id=106)
This is probably the most contentious of the seven reasons, and it goes to the heart of the current debate about trade with China and the
use of sanctions in the name of human rights and democracy. By raising the general standard of living, free trade helps people achieve
higher levels of education and to gain access to alternative sources of information. It helps to create a more independently minded
middle class that can form the backbone of more representative kinds of government. The wealth created from expanded trade can
help to nurture and sustain civil institutions that can offer ideas and influence outside of government. The emergence of civil liberties
and more representative government in countries such as Taiwan, South Korea, and Mexico can be credited in large part to economic
development spurred by free trade and market reforms. As a general rule, nations that are more open economically tend to enjoy other
liberties as well. In the last 25 years, as the world has turned away from centralized economic controls and toward a more open global
market, political and civil freedoms have also spread. In 1975, only 42 countries in the world were classified by the non-profit group
Freedom House as being politically free, where citizens enjoy full civil and political freedoms. Today the number has more than
doubled to 85. The percentage of the world’s people enjoying full civil and political freedom has also more than doubled during that
time, from 18 percent to 40 percent. In his book, Business as a Calling, Michael Novak explains the linkage with what he calls “the
wedge theory”: Capitalist practices, runs the theory, bring contact with the ideas and practices of the free societies, generate the
economic growth that gives political confidence to a rising middle class, and raise up successful business leaders who come to
represent a political alternative to military or party leaders. In short, capitalist firms wedge a democratic camel’s nose under the
authoritarian tent. Religiously motivated conservatives who want to impose sanctions against China would undermine progress on
human rights by removing one of the most positive influences in Chinese society. Granted, the Chinese government today remains an
oppressive dictatorship, a bad regime that jails its political opponents and interferes in the private lives of its citizens. But for all its
unforgivable faults, the Chinese government today is not nearly as bad as the government was during the totalitarian rule of Mao Tse-
tung, when millions were killed and the entire social order was convulsed by the Great Leap Forward and the Cultural Revolution. The
people of China do not yet enjoy the range of political and civil rights we do
24
Free Trade Good
DDI 2008 KO
Sarah Ungureit
US Interests
Free trade promotes U.S. interests
With 150 members in the WTO, the United States benefits from the increased market access generated by past multilateral
agreements. Along with multilateral trade liberalization in the WTO, regional and bilateral free trade agreements also serve as
important U.S. trade policy tools.10 The U.S. has been seeking comprehensive and high-standard trade agreements that are “tailored
to reflect a world of high technology, complex new intellectual property standards, labor and environmental considerations, and the
growth of the service sector.”11 While multilateral negotiations take time, FTAs allow the U.S. to make agreements with countries that
are willing to dismantle foreign trade barriers rapidly. In the process, FTAs formed with different countries or regions can serve as
building blocks for broader agreements and provide institutional competition that helps to keep multilateral talks on track. As of April
2007, the U.S. has 10 FTAs with 16 countries: Israel; Canada and Mexico (NAFTA); Jordan; Singapore; Chile; Australia; Bahrain;
Oman; Morocco; and the Dominican Republic, Costa Rica, El Salvador, Guatemala, Honduras, and Nicaragua (DR–CAFTA12).
While some countries are still working to implement more recent trade agreement legislation, the U.S. has already seen impressive
results. The FTAs account for more than $900 billion in two-way trade, which is about 36 percent of the total of U.S. trade with the
world. U.S. exports to FTA partner countries are growing twice as fast as U.S. exports to countries that do not share FTAs with the
U.S.13 The oft-demonized NAFTA has in fact generated significant gains for the U.S. since its inception. Canada and Mexico are
America’s first and second largest trade partners, accounting for about 36 percent of all U.S. export growth in 2005.14 Between 1993
and 2005, U.S. manufacturing and agriculture exports to Canada and Mexico grew by 133 percent and 55 percent, respectively. Each
day, NAFTA countries conduct roughly $2.2 billion in trilateral trade.15 This trade supports U.S. jobs, bolsters productivity, and
promotes investment. Whether the U.S. pursues freer trade through multilateral negotiations or through bilateral agreements, the result
is fair and beneficial for America. Similar to the objectives sought by U.S. negotiators in the WTO, U.S. free trade agreements go
beyond winning lower tariffs on American agriculture, manufacturing, and services exports. FTAs include provisions that safeguard
investors from discrimination, increase regulatory transparency, protect and enforce intellectual property rights, combat corruptive
practices, protect and strengthen labor rights, and support environmental protection. The U.S. Trade Representative (USTR) negotiates
agreements that include transparent dispute resolution and arbitration mechanisms to guarantee that the agreements are upheld along
with the rights of U.S. firms and consumers. Each element of an FTA strengthens the transparent and efficient flow of goods, services,
and investments between member countries. Both FTAs and multilateral trade liberalization open markets, protect investors, and
increase economic opportunity and prosperity. In short, freer trade policies serve to promote U.S. interests, not to weaken them or to
place an unfair burden on Americans.
25
Free Trade Good
DDI 2008 KO
Sarah Ungureit
International Cooperation
Free markets key to international cooperation
Anthony Kim, Policy Analyst in the Center for International Trade and Economics-7/19/07, “The Asian
Financial Crisis 10 Years Later: Time to Reaffirm Economic Freedom”, heritage Foundation, heritage.org)
Today's economic growth and prosperity depend on maintaining and improving an environment in which entrepreneurial activities and
innovation can flourish. Investment capital and entrepreneurial talent will flow toward economies with low taxes, secure property
rights, sound money, and sensible regulatory policies. Countries with higher degrees of openness and flexibility benefit from the free
exchange of commerce and thereby enjoy sustainable economic growth and prosperity. This relationship is documented in the Index
of Economic Freedom, published by The Heritage Foundation and The Wall Street Journal, which measures economic freedom around
the globe.\ The Index identifies the strong synergies among the 10 key ingredients of economic freedom, which include (among
others) low tax rates, low tariffs, low levels of regulation, limited government intervention, strong property rights, open capital
markets, and low levels of corruption. For the past 13 years, the Index has demonstrated that economic freedom is crucial to economic
development and sustained prosperity in an increasingly integrated global market. Why would economic freedom contribute to
economic growth and prosperity? In a framework of economic freedom, people are free to use their abilities and have a better chance
of success when trying their innovative ideas and starting new entrepreneurial activities. With more opportunities and the prospect of
greater returns, people are more willing to invest. As a result, the level of investment and innovation increases.
26
Free Trade Good
DDI 2008 KO
Sarah Ungureit
Economic Development
Free trade increases economic development in poor countries

The average U.S. tariff rate on all goods has fallen from over 19 percent in 1933 to 1.8 percent in 2004. • As a percentage of GDP, the
importance of trade in the economy has climbed from single digits in the 1930s to nearly one-quarter of U.S. GDP in 2004. • At the
same time that trade has become freer, real per capita GDP in the U.S. (in constant 2000 dollars) has climbed from a low of $5,061 in
1933 to about $36,000 in 2004. Freer trade has been a driving force behind America’s high standard of living and promises even more
if trade barriers can be broken down even further. The Institute for International Economics estimates that over the past 50 years, trade
liberalization has brought an additional $9,000 per year to the typical American household.7 The North American Free Trade
Agreement (NAFTA) and the Uruguay Round of the WTO—the two major agreements of the 1990s—generate annual benefits of
$1,300–$2,000 for the average American family of four.8 Freer trade enables more goods and services to reach American consumers at
lower prices, giving families more income to save or spend on other goods and services. Moreover, the benefits of free trade extend
well beyond American households. Free trade helps to spread freedom globally, reinforces the rule of law, and fosters economic
development in poor countries. The World Bank reports that in the 1990s, per capita real income grew three times faster in developing
countries that lowered trade barriers than in developing countries that did not do so. In fact, over the past 25 years, roughly 500
million people have been lifted from poverty largely as a result of freer trade and market reforms.9
27
Free Trade Good
DDI 2008 KO
Sarah Ungureit
Corruption
Free trade increases reform, and reduces corruption
Andrew Berg, First Deputy Managing Director of the IMF and Anne Kruger, , Deputy
Division Chief of the Financial Studies Division of the IMF's Research Department 9/02
"Lifting All Boats: Why Openness Helps Curb Poverty," Finance & Development: A
Quarterly Magazine of the IMF, September 2002, Volume 39, Number 3,
http://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/fandd/2002/09/berg.htm
Positive spillovers Much of the evidence in favor of openness spurring growth and reducing poverty is
vulnerable to the criticism that the effect of openness has not been isolated from that of many other
reforms that were often implemented at the same time. In our view, the fact that trade openness tends to
happen at the same time as other beneficial reforms and, indeed, is associated with strong institutional
environments is an econometric problem but also a policy opportunity. First, insofar as the evidence gives
us a lead, it suggests that openness is a particularly important component of reform. Second, there is little
evidence that other reforms must precede effective trade reform, though there are many reforms that are
complementary. Finally, trade openness has positive spillovers on other aspects of reform so that, on the
whole, the correlation of trade with other proreform policies speaks to the advantages of making openness
a primary part of the reform package. In our view, there are few true preconditions—that is, conditions in
the absence of which trade openness is a poor idea. Openness seems to promote growth in the poorest
countries at least as well as in others. For example, in closed economies, low initial income reduces
potential benefits from economies of scale, suppressing growth. But trade openness, by allowing access to
broader markets, helps overcome this impediment. To this extent, the poorest economies, with the
smallest home markets, may benefit the most. More broadly, there is little evidence of a "growth trap" in
the sense of a situation in which countries become too poor to take off. The growth miracles of the
twentieth century occurred in countries starting far behind the richest. Many factors can make trade
reform more successful, or less so. For example, a more egalitarian initial income distribution implies that a
given amount of average growth has a larger impact on the poverty rate, all else held equal. Certain
factors, such as higher rates of education, may permit the poor to benefit more fully from growth. Of
course, these are arguments not against trade reform but rather in favor of pursuing these complementary
reforms as well. The most important set of relationships, in our view, has to do with positive spillovers from
trade reform. In many cases and in many ways, trade liberalization is itself a precondition or a complement
to other sorts of reforms and thus facilitates their success. Openness provides powerful channels for
feedback on the effect of various policies on productivity and growth. For example, competition with
foreign firms can expose inefficient industrial policies. Trade raises the marginal product of other reforms,
in that better infrastructure, telephones, roads, and ports translate into better performance of the export
sector. Moreover, though less visibly, productivity for domestic goods rises as well. Trade liberalization may
change the political reform dynamic by creating constituencies for further reform. It is sometimes argued
that an absence of adequate prior institutional reform may limit the gains from openness. In our view,
strong institutions are likely to be a powerful complement to trade liberalization, but there is little or no
evidence to suggest that waiting for institutional reform is a good idea. On the contrary, there is strong
evidence that openness may encourage institutional reform and, in particular, reduce corruption.
Corruption is higher in countries where domestic firms are sheltered from foreign competition, and the
estimated size of this effect is large. Conclusion Openness is not a "magic bullet"; much else matters for
growth and poverty reduction. But this conclusion should not distract us from the importance of trade
liberalization in developing countries. Trade is only one aspect of the development process. However, the
breadth of evidence on openness, growth, and poverty reduction, and the strength of the association
between openness and other important determinants of high per capita income, such as the quality of
institutions, should give long pause to anyone contemplating the adoption of a novel (or tested and failed)
development strategy that does not center on openness to trade.
28
Free Trade Good
DDI 2008 KO
Sarah Ungureit
Economic Reform
Free trade key to political and economic reform-Mexico proves
George Gedda, State Department correspondent for. the Associated Press Washington Post-5/7/01 “Powell
Cites Free Trade Benefits”, (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/aponline/)
Speaking to a gathering of the Council of the Americas, a hemispheric business group, Powell said the North American Free Trade
Agreement is a powerful example of the benefits free trade can bring. Powell said that during NAFTA's first five years of existence,
employment increased in Mexico by 22 percent, in Canada by 10 percent and in the United States by more than 7 percent. "Did
NAFTA hurt democracy in Mexico?" Powell asked. "No. Today, Mexico has a president elected from the opposition, the first in 70
years. It has freer labor unions, a freer press and a growing number of active nongovernmental organizations." He said President
Vicente Fox is questioning "all the old models in Mexico and directly confronting violence and justice, crime and corruption. He
deserves and receives our full support." At the recent Summit of the Americas in Quebec, hemispheric leaders reaffirmed a
commitment to conclude a regional free trade agreement by 2005. Anti-free trade groups sought to disrupt the proceedings, some
arguing that free trade puts profits ahead of the needs of workers. Others maintained that NAFTA has not produced any benefits for
Mexican workers.
29

158 KO Free Trade Good

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

158 KO Free Trade Good

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Free Trade Good

Free Trade Good

Free trade key to US economy.

Free trade key to economic growth.

Free trade fosters economic growth.

Free trade spurs global economic growth.

Free trade key to economic growth

Freer Trade promotes economic growth and prosperity

Free trade promotes economic growth and poverty reduction

Free trade creates an incentive for environmental protection

Free trade leads to higher environmental standards

Free trade good for the environment

Free Trade results in higher productivity

Free trade key to US soft power – US leadership on trade is critical.

Free trade is vital to us leadership

Free trade is key to u.s. global leadership

Free trade creates jobs

Free trade increases competition and efficiency

Free trade fosters competition and leads to efficiency

Openness to trade is key to innovation

Free trade promotes world peace.

Free trade fosters cooperation between nations, leading to global peace.

Free trade spreads democracy globally.

Free trade empowers individuals and promotes democratic values

Free trade encourages basic human rights and representative government

Free trade increases economic development in poor countries

You might also like