World trade and U.S. law

The Senate, if it must, will return for a lame-duck session after the elections to approve the trade bill, the Democratic leadership said Thursday. The House, meanwhile, is scheduled to vote and is expected to approve the bill next week. It ought to do so. Some members say that they, too, should be allowed to wait until after the election. Why cast a hard vote in advance?

Here's why: It's wrong for Congress to flinch from responsibility. That's one of the reasons the public tends with to hold it in contempt. It's wrong as well for the Senate to be so bound up in its flowery and indulgent rules as to let a single member or small group of members hold it hostage, as its Commerce Committee chairman is now doing on trade. That, too, makes the institution look ridiculous.

This trade bill is no ordinary legislation. It seeks to write the new world trade agreement into U.S. law. That agreement, through billions of dollars in tariff reductions and by other means, will cause the entire world economy to expand -- the U.S. economy along with it. It means jobs at home. Beyond there, the better off the poorer countries of the world become, the more stable they are likely to be, and perhaps the more progressive. That is not just theory.

The agreement was seven years in the making. The Reagan and Bush administrations pursued it just as the Clinton administration has. There was abundant consultation with affected interest groups and Congress throughout the process. The United States has signed the pact.

Should Congress fail to approve it, this government would be perceived to be retreating on its word. Other signers might also balk; the agreement could unravel.

Some industries -- the textile industry in the home state of Senator Ernest Hollings now the principal objector -- want to continue to be protected from foreign competition. So do some labor groups. But there's no way to wall off an economy in this kind of world. Most of the other arguments raised against the pact are redherrings. No, it won't infringe on U.S. sovereignty, it won't undercut U.S. health and safety, environmental or labor standards and it won't ultimately add to the deficit either. In the aggregate, it will add to employment in this country, not reduce it. Majorities of both houses and, we would guess, both parties are in favor of the pact. They ought to cast their votes and, in the case of the Senate, be allowed to cast their votes next week. Then they can go home.

-- The Washington Post