[CTC] WaPo article on Peterson Institute study, including manufacturing job loss estimates

[Walker Grooms]

Apologies for any cross-postings. See passages that I've put in bold for
manufacturing job loss estimates.

The subtitle for this article on WaPo's search results page reads (italics
mine): "*Analysis says Trans-Pacific Partnership could force 50,000 U.S.
workers each year to find new jobs.*"
----
‘Landmark’ Pacific Rim trade deal could boost U.S. exports
Resize Text
Print Article
Comments 26
<https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/landmark-pacific-rim-trade-deal-could-boost-us-exports/2016/01/24/ab2c9af0-c2b1-11e5-8965-0607e0e265ce_story.html#>

President Obama in the Oval Office of the White House. (Carolyn Kaster/AP)
By David Nakamura <http://www.washingtonpost.com/people/david-nakamura> and Jim
Tankersley <http://www.washingtonpost.com/people/jim-tankersley> January 25
at 5:01 AM
<david.nakamura at washpost.com;jim.tankersley at washpost.com?subject=Reader%20feedback%20for%20%27%E2%80%98Landmark%E2%80%99%20Pacific%20Rim%20trade%20deal%20could%20boost%20U.S.%20exports%27>

A Pacific Rim trade deal championed by the Obama administration represents
a “landmark accord” that would yield considerable economic gains for the
United States and 11 other nations, boosting exports by 9 percent a year
and increasing wages, according to an analysis released Monday.

*But the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) would not increase job creation
overall, and it could force 50,000 U.S. workers each year to find new jobs,
a process that might require them to pursue new training, the nonpartisan
Peterson Institute for International Economics said in its report.*

*Those workers, mostly in low-wage manufacturing, “may experience serious
transition costs including lasting wage cuts and unemployment,” economists
Peter A. Petri and Michael G. Plummer wrote.* The report stated that as
jobs were eliminated in traditional manufacturing, an equal number of about
50,000 new jobs would be created each year in high-tech manufacturing and
service sectors as the U.S. economy undergoes structural changes.

The Peterson Institute study is the most thorough independent assessment of
the economic impact of the TPP, the largest regional trade accord in
history. The Obama administration hopes the findings will help persuade
Republican leaders in Congress to schedule a vote on the deal before the
November presidential vote.

Overall, the Peterson study concludes that the TPP could be as
consequential for the United States as the North American Free Trade
Agreement, which Congress ratified under President Bill Clinton. The
economists said the U.S. economy would lose $77 billion in benefits if
lawmakers delay ratification by one year.

“We’re at a point where the American economy is stronger and the case for a
big international agreement is stronger than it has been for 20 years,”
Petri said in an interview. “This will not cure all of the problems in the
U.S. economy, but put all together it does seem to me that it is a strong
case the president is making.”
CONTENT FROM Make In India 2016 is India's growth year for pharma
The world's generics giant seeks a lead in end-to-end manufacturing.
<http://www.washingtonpost.com/sf/brand-connect/2016-is-indias-growth-year-for-pharma/>

President Obama has called the pact his top economic priority
<https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/obamas-evolution-on-trade-will-put-him-at-war-with-his-party/2015/04/15/dabd42f4-ccc8-11e4-a2a7-9517a3a70506_story.html>
and said it is crucial for the United States to meet the challenge of a
rising China. In recent weeks, major business organizations, including the
U.S. Chamber of Commerce, the Business Roundtable and the National
Association of Manufacturers, have endorsed the accord
<https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-politics/wp/2016/01/06/u-s-chamber-of-commerce-endorses-obamas-pacific-rim-trade-pact/>.


But at a time when middle-class Americans remain concerned about stagnant
wages, the pact has come under fierce criticism from front-runners on both
sides of the presidential campaign trail. Republicans Donald Trump and Sen.
Ted Cruz (Tex.) and Democrats Hillary Clinton and Sen. Bernie Sanders (Vt.)
have said they do not support the TPP
<https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-politics/wp/2015/10/07/hillary-clinton-comes-out-against-obamas-pacific-trade-deal/>.
A coalition of hundreds of labor, environmental, faith and public health
organizations denounced the accord
<https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-politics/wp/2016/01/07/hundreds-of-advocacy-groups-ask-congress-to-block-obamas-pacific-rim-trade-pact/>
in a letter to lawmakers this month.

U.S. Trade Representative Michael Froman is scheduled to travel to New
Zealand on Feb. 4 to join 11 other trade ministers in a formal signing
ceremony for the TPP, which was finalized in October
<https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/economy/deal-reached-on-pacific-rim-trade-pact/2015/10/05/7c567f00-6b56-11e5-b31c-d80d62b53e28_story.html>.
After that, lawmakers could begin scheduling votes, but Senate Majority
Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) has raised concerns about provisions in the
deal and suggested that the process could be delayed until after the
elections.

“This independent analysis shows that TPP will raise wages for American
workers, grow our economy, and help farmers and businesses export more
‘Made in America’ products,” Froman said in a statement. “Importantly, it
also shows that sitting on the sideline and delaying TPP, even for a short
time, will cost us dearly.”

The International Trade Commission began hearings
<https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/powerpost/wp/2016/01/21/independent-agency-holds-big-sway-over-the-tpp-trade-deal/>
two weeks ago for its own analysis of the TPP, a report that officials said
will be finished by May 18.

The Peterson Institute’s analysis suggests that the agreement would boost
exports by 9 percent above what they would be in 2030, when the deal is
fully implemented, and would lift the U.S. economy overall by 0.5 percent a
year. In part, that is because the agreement does more than the analysts
had originally expected to reduce tariffs, the import taxes in other
countries that make it harder for U.S. companies to sell goods and services
there.

If those projections are correct, that additional growth would help a
domestic economy that has struggled to regain the growth rates of previous
decades in the wake of the Great Recession.

The analysis projects a larger payoff for U.S. growth from the agreement
than a similar study from the World Bank
<http://www.worldbank.org/en/publication/global-economic-prospects/GEP-Jan-2016-Implications-Trans-Pacific-Partnership>
predicted earlier this month. Both studies, however, agree that the deal
would benefit other trading partners much more than it would benefit the
United States.

In sheer dollar terms, the United States would benefit the most from the
agreement, the Peterson researchers estimate. But other countries, such as
Vietnam and Malaysia, would see far greater benefits when measured as a
share of their economies: as much as 10 percent each annually.

Those calculations could give fodder to politicians, such as Trump, who
have criticized the agreement as a bad deal for the United States. Petri, a
professor of international finance at Brandeis University, acknowledged as
much, saying that it “bothers a lot of people.”

Obama has said the TPP is crucial to maintaining U.S. primacy in high-tech
manufacturing and service industry sectors such as finance, Internet
services and entertainment. He has won little support among congressional
Democrats, who have sided with labor unions that have decried the impact
that NAFTA and previous trade deals have had on traditional manufacturing.

The Peterson study said that although manufacturing would continue to grow,
it would do so at a slower rate: *By 2030, there would be 121,000 fewer
manufacturing jobs than there would be without the deal.* The authors
suggested that lawmakers should enact policies to help displaced workers.

*Although the overall economy could be improved by the deal, Petri said,
the negative impact on “individual people or individual communities could
affect them quite hard.” *


-- 
Walker Grooms
Office Manager/Program Support Officer
Witness for Peace
Office: 202-547-6112
Skype: WalkerGroomsWFP
walker at witnessforpeace dot org
witnessforpeace dot org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.citizenstrade.org/pipermail/ctcfield-citizenstrade.org/attachments/20160126/00bd31d2/attachment.htm>