
                         Roanoke Times
                 Copyright (c) 1995, Landmark Communications, Inc.

DATE: TUESDAY, September 20, 1994                   TAG: 9411020017
SECTION: EDITORIAL                    PAGE: A4   EDITION: METRO 
SOURCE: 
DATELINE:                                 LENGTH: Medium

DON'T LET POLITICS KILL THE TRADE PACT

UNBELIEVABLE. Now Robert Dole, the Senate minority leader who occasionally shows an interest in sabotaging and succeeding President Clinton, is reportedly thinking of blocking congressional approval this year of an important world trade agreement.

If he does so, in the remaining days of the session, what a disgrace for the Republican and for any who follow his lead.

They'd be joining the unholy alliance of Ralph Nader and Patrick Buchanan, not to mention assorted environmentalist extremists, special-interest protectionists, leftist activists and right-wing isolationists who oppose the global trade pact for a variety of ignoble reasons.

Recently signed by the United States and 116 other nations, the revised General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade required more than seven years of grueling negotiations to complete. It isn't perfect. But it would reduce and eliminate more trade barriers than any such agreement in history. It would lower tariffs around the globe by a third. It would extend fair-trade rules to areas of commerce formerly not covered, such as services, agriculture and intellectual property.

And who is in the best position to take advantage of such trade liberalization? Why, the world's No. 1 exporter, of course - the United States. The new and improved GATT would help open markets and lower barriers to U.S. products, thus creating jobs for American workers. (A nice plus: Employment in export industries pays 22 percent more than the average U.S. wage.)

As for consumers: Forget Nader's claim to be their advocate. Freer trade almost always translates into greater selection and lower prices.

Ignoring the good deal in GATT, critics prefer to focus on a new institution formed under the pact, the World Trade Organization. This body would oversee the fair-trade rules and sort out disputes; the need for it is clear. Yet Nader sees the WTO as a threat to America's ability to set its own labor, environmental and health and safety standards, while the nativist Buchanan sees it as a threat to U.S. sovereignty.

It is neither, but opposition is growing nonetheless, especially among liberal Democrats in Congress. A further complication is the need to make budgetary provision for recovering lost tariff revenues, estimated at more than $10 billion over the first five years. In the long run, the GATT-inspired export boom will generate far more revenue than is given up in tariffs.

But never mind: One of the spending cuts the Clinton administration has recommended to offset tariff losses is in agricultural subsidies. Cutting welfare for affluent farmers can be an unpopular move in a state like Kansas, even if its senior senator does call himself a conservative.

Free-trader Republicans played an important role in helping President Clinton overcome opposition within his own party to achieve ratification of the North American Free Trade Agreement. Now the same thing needs to happen with GATT.

Dole might humiliate President Clinton by helping to delay action on the pact, as the critics demand, until after its effective date of Jan. 1, 1995. But doing so would hurt the country and every citizen who might benefit from lower tariffs. Surely the minority leader doesn't want that.

by CNB