By Jim Lobe
WASHINGTON, Mar. 28 (IPS) -- Most U.S. citizens support trade and deeper integration into the global economy so long as workers' rights and environmental protection are not compromised, according to a new study released here Tuesday.
The public is also willing to undergo economic sacrifice, including possible job losses and higher prices for consumer goods, if that results in a n improvement in living standards and working conditions in poorer nations, according to the report by the University of Maryland's Program on International Policy Attitudes (PIPA).
The 96-page study, an elaboration of a survey first released last November in advance of the World Trade Organization (WTO) ministerial meeting in Seattle, finds strong support for continued growth in world trade but a "significant lack of confidence" in the way trade is being developed, according to Steven Kull, the main author of the study, "Americans on Globalization."
The public, he said, believes the government "can do more and should do more" to protect U.S. workers and the environment from the consequences of globalization. In particular, it should devote much greater resources to retraining workers who lose their jobs as a result of overseas competition.
The study comes at a critical moment as Congress prepares to vote on two key trade measures over the next 10 weeks. If passed, they would be the first major trade bills, despite a number of efforts by Clinton, approved by Congress in more than five years.
They include a bill, different versions of which have passed both houses, that would offer new trade preferences to countries of sub-Saharan Africa and the Caribbean Basin, and another that would grant China permanent normal trade relations (NTR).
The latter bill, the most controversial piece of foreign-policy legislation to be debated in Congress this year, would permit Washington to take full advantage of a trade agreement the administration reached with China late last year. It would also facilitate China's entry into the WTO.
Both bills are strongly opposed by a coalition of organized labor -- a key constituency of President Bill Clinton's Democratic Party -- and various environmental groups which together have made defeating the China NTR bill their top legislative priority this year precisely because it does not provide for any enforceable protections for workers' rights and the environment.
In addition, a number of right-wing Republicans oppose the China bill due to concerns about Beijing's communist government and its long-run strategic ambitions. The powerful textile lobby, which wields clout in both parties, also opposes both bills.
On the other side, U.S. corporations with major overseas interests strongly favor both bills, as do a majority of Republican lawmakers and both of the two major presidential candidates -- Democratic Vice President Al Gore and Texas Gov. George W. Bush.
Both sides are likely to seize on the new report as evidence of public support for their positions. While business will see in it a repudiation of traditional protectionist positions, opponents of pending trade bills will trumpet its strong support for placing conditions on trade.
"The American public does not buy the 'trade uber alles' idea," said Lori Wallach, a leader of the anti-China trade forces, at a briefing on the report at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace here Tuesday.
The report -- based on existing polling data, an extensive survey of more than 100 questions directed at some 1,800 randomly selected respondents just before the Seattle meeting, and discussions with "focus groups" around the country -- found a strong consensus behind Clinton's own stated policy that future trade agreements must provide enforceable protections for workers' rights and the environment. That policy, which was strongly rejected by many developing nations at the WTO meeting in Seattle, however, is not reflected in the two pending trade bills.
"In principle, a majority of Americans support the growth of international trade, especially when the removal of trade barriers is clearly reciprocal," the report states. "However, Americans are lukewarm about the actual net benefits of trade for most sectors of society ... A strong majority f eels trade has not grown in a way that adequately incorporates concerns for American workers, international labor standards and the environment."
Asked specifically about whether the WTO should consider labor standards and the environment when making decisions on trade and given the major arguments for and against, four out of five respondents gave affirmative answers.
Moreover, some 93 percent of respondents agreed with the statement that "countries that are part of the international trade agreements should be required to maintain minimum standards for working conditions."
"That's the biggest number we've ever gotten on a poll," Kull said.
More than 70 percent of respondents said U.S. trade policy mainly benefits business and the wealthy and does not give enough consideration to average citizens. Two-thirds of respondents said the government should invest more in retraining and education for workers hurt by overseas trading.
Their concern for workers, however, was not confined to those within the United States. Three out of four respondents agreed that they had a "moral obligation to make efforts to ensure that (people in other countries) do not have to work in harsh or unsafe conditions."
A slightly greater percentage agreed that they would prefer to spend $25 for a piece of clothing that they knew was produced in non-sweatshop conditions than $20 for the same piece of clothing if they did not know how it was made.
Similarly, more than four out of five respondents said U.S. corporations should be expected to abide by U.S. laws and regulations on working conditions and environmental protection in their operations abroad.
The survey also found strong support -- ranging between two-thirds and four-fifths -- for imposing trade sanctions against countries accused of serious human rights violations, terrorism, or environmental destruction. That finding could bode ill for the pending China bill because opponents argue that renewing Beijing's NTR status on an annual basis permits Congress to review its human-rights record.
Indeed, three out of four of the survey's respondents said Washington should limit its trade with China due to its poor human-rights record, a finding that was echoed in another poll taken two months ago by Peter D. Hart Research Associates. It found that two-thirds of likely voters oppose permanent NTR status for China without annual Congressional reviews.
The Kull survey, according to experts here, shows a growing consensus in favor of continuing globalization subject to conditions. "The public thinks that free trade is here to stay," said Guy Molyneux, a top pollster for the Hart firm. "But what they are saying is they want some kind o f rules and standards." Without such standards, he added "it is simply impossible for free trade to continue."
Wallach, who heads Public Citizen's Global Trade Watch, agreed. "While globalization may be inevitable," she said, "the particular way of doing it is not."
Since the poll was taken, she said, grassroots activity directed against the China bill, in particular, has grown manifold, primarily because the public protests against the WTO meeting in Seattle had made the trade issue far more visible.
While most experts agree that the Seattle protests had a marginal effect on public attitudes towards free trade and globalization, the protests greatly magnified public awareness about the two issues.:
