<div dir="ltr"><div>Apologies for any cross-postings. See passages that I've put in bold for manufacturing job loss estimates.<br></div><br>The subtitle for this article on WaPo's search results page reads (italics mine): "<i>Analysis says Trans-Pacific Partnership could force 50,000 U.S. workers each year to find new jobs.</i>"<div>----<br><h1 itemprop="headline">‘Landmark’ Pacific Rim trade deal could boost U.S. exports</h1> <div class="" id="fZTx4n1NORmOAp"> <div id="utilities-tool_1506" class=""> <div class=""> <div class=""> <div class=""> <div class=""><span class="" tabindex="_tbidx_">Resize Text</span><span class=""></span></div><a tabindex="_tbidx_"> <div class=""><span class="">Print Article</span><span class=""></span></div> </a><a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/landmark-pacific-rim-trade-deal-could-boost-us-exports/2016/01/24/ab2c9af0-c2b1-11e5-8965-0607e0e265ce_story.html#" tabindex="_tbidx_"> <div class=""><span class="">Comments</span><span class=""></span> <span id="echo_container" class="">26</span></div> </a></div> </div> </div> <div id="slug_tiffany_tile" class="" style="display:block;padding-left:20px!important;height:auto;max-height:60px;overflow:hidden"> </div> </div> </div> <div class=""> <a name="236cf7ef7311b0b937dfea391352d2a482fdb7c6"></a> <img class="" src="https://img.washingtonpost.com/rf/image_400w/2010-2019/WashingtonPost/2016/01/25/National-Politics/Images/Obama_US_Australia-0c0cd-3501.jpg?uuid=3cCkhsMdEeWJZQYH4OJlzg"><br> <span class="">President Obama in the Oval Office of the White House. (Carolyn Kaster/AP)</span> </div> <div class=""> <span class="" itemprop="author" itemscope="" itemtype="http://schema.org/Person">By <a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/people/david-nakamura"><span itemprop="name">David Nakamura</span></a> and <a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/people/jim-tankersley"><span itemprop="name">Jim Tankersley</span></a></span> <span class="" itemprop="datePublished" content="2016-01-25T05:01-500">January 25 at 5:01 AM</span> <span class=""><a href="mailto:david.nakamura@washpost.com;jim.tankersley@washpost.com?subject=Reader%20feedback%20for%20%27%E2%80%98Landmark%E2%80%99%20Pacific%20Rim%20trade%20deal%20could%20boost%20U.S.%20exports%27"><span class=""></span></a></span> <span class=""><span class=""></span> <span class=""></span> </span> </div> <p>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.</p> <p><b>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.</b></p> <p><b>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.</b> 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. </p> <p>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. </p> <p>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. </p> <p>“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.”</p><div class=""><div class="">
<div class="">
<div class="" style="background-image:url("//meraxes-cdn.polarmobile.com/image/v1.0.0/bin/5696813eb5b25b1aa81d6ce0?v=dcdc4\000026w=700\000026h=800")">
</div>
<div class="">
<span class="">CONTENT FROM Make In India</span>
<a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/sf/brand-connect/2016-is-indias-growth-year-for-pharma/" rel="nofollow">
<span class="">2016 is India's growth year for pharma</span>
<div>
<span class="">The world's generics giant seeks a lead in end-to-end manufacturing.</span>
</div>
</a>
</div>
</div>
</div></div> <p>President Obama has called the pact his <a href="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" title="www.washingtonpost.com">top economic priority</a>
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 <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-politics/wp/2016/01/06/u-s-chamber-of-commerce-endorses-obamas-pacific-rim-trade-pact/" title="www.washingtonpost.com">endorsed the accord</a>. </p> <p>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 <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-politics/wp/2015/10/07/hillary-clinton-comes-out-against-obamas-pacific-trade-deal/" title="www.washingtonpost.com">do not support the TPP</a>. A coalition of hundreds of labor, environmental, faith and public health organizations <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-politics/wp/2016/01/07/hundreds-of-advocacy-groups-ask-congress-to-block-obamas-pacific-rim-trade-pact/" title="www.washingtonpost.com">denounced the accord</a> in a letter to lawmakers this month.</p> <p>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 <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/economy/deal-reached-on-pacific-rim-trade-pact/2015/10/05/7c567f00-6b56-11e5-b31c-d80d62b53e28_story.html" title="www.washingtonpost.com">finalized in October</a>.
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. </p> <p>“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.”</p> <p>The International Trade Commission <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/powerpost/wp/2016/01/21/independent-agency-holds-big-sway-over-the-tpp-trade-deal/" title="www.washingtonpost.com">began hearings</a> two weeks ago for its own analysis of the TPP, a report that officials said will be finished by May 18. </p> <p>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.</p> <p>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. </p> <p>The analysis projects a larger payoff for U.S. growth from the agreement than <a href="http://www.worldbank.org/en/publication/global-economic-prospects/GEP-Jan-2016-Implications-Trans-Pacific-Partnership" title="www.worldbank.org">a similar study from the World Bank</a>
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.</p> <p>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.</p> <p>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.”</p> <p>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. </p> <p>The Peterson study said that although
manufacturing would continue to grow, it would do so at a slower rate:
<b>By 2030, there would be 121,000 fewer manufacturing jobs than there
would be without the deal.</b> The authors suggested that lawmakers should
enact policies to help displaced workers.</p> <p><b>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.” </b></p> <br clear="all"><div><br>-- <br><div class="gmail_signature"><div dir="ltr"><div><div dir="ltr"><div><div dir="ltr"><div><div dir="ltr">Walker Grooms<div>Office Manager/Program Support Officer<br></div><div>Witness for Peace<br></div><div>Office: 202-547-6112<br><div>Skype: WalkerGroomsWFP<br></div><div>walker at witnessforpeace dot org<br></div><div>witnessforpeace dot org<br></div><br><div><br></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div>
</div></div></div>