Our Free-Trade Consensus

It may seem odd during an election year to find two former White House chiefs of staff – one Democrat and another Republican – jointly penning an op-ed. But there is at least one thing we agree on, and that is the need to restore a bipartisan consensus in favor of free trade.

Last May, the administration and Congress achieved an important breakthrough on the treatment of labor and environmental issues in bilateral free trade agreements. This deal, negotiated in good faith by respected leaders from both parties, gave hope to those of us who believe America's future prosperity depends on active engagement in the global economy.

Yet today, the deal is being put to the test by the U.S.-Colombia Free Trade Agreement (FTA) now ready to be considered by Congress. Not only are economic gains at stake; there are also important political and strategic interests to consider.

On the trade front, it is important to understand that, as Under Secretary of Commerce Chris Padilla has said, the U.S. already has free trade with Colombia – but it's "one-way free trade." Thanks to the Andean Trade Preferences Act, which Congress passed 16 years ago, Colombian exporters pay tariffs on only 8% of the goods they send to the U.S. Meanwhile, U.S. exporters currently pay tariffs – some as high as 35% -- on 97% of the products we sell Colombia.

The U.S.-Colombia FTA would level this uneven playing field, eliminating the tariffs on U.S. goods and creating new market access for U.S. service suppliers. And it would do all of this with a major trading partner. The U.S. exports more to Colombia than Russia, even though Russia has a population that is three times larger and an economy seven times that of Colombia.

Under the agreement now before Congress, U.S. exports to Colombia, from cars to chemicals to consumer products, would grow by an estimated $1 billion per year – a direct benefit to U.S. workers and their families. From Colombia's perspective, the FTA would add a welcome dimension of certainty to our trading relationship, encouraging investors to commit to Colombia and help create jobs there, too.

In addition, the agreement would send an important signal of support to a close neighbor, friend and ally. Over the past 10 years, Colombia has made tremendous political and economic progress, and great strides in turning back the tide of narco-terrorism that threatened the region's stability. The U.S. has been a key partner in that effort – beginning with the Clinton administration's 1999 aid plan, which continues as Plan Colombia. The results are impressive. Roughly 30,000 paramilitary fighters have been demobilized. Terrorist attacks, kidnappings and homicides in Colombia have plummeted over the past several years. A decade ago, residents of Medellin – the center of the drug trade in Colombia – would not visit their local plaza without armed bodyguards. Today, parents and children enjoy the city's plazas and parks without fear.

To be sure, there still is work to be done. While Colombian President Alvaro Uribe has taken significant steps to protect trade unionists, for example, violence persists against labor leaders. But as the many Colombian unions that support the trade agreement know, rejecting the agreement will not save a single life – whereas passing it will be a powerful vote of confidence in the democracy Colombians have struggled so hard to protect. The regional role of Colombia as an enduring democracy, working in partnership with the U.S., is a powerful signal to neighboring countries as well.

Both presidents we were privileged to serve were committed to security in the Western Hemisphere and to opening new markets to goods through free trade. For instance, both presidents signed important trade agreements that opened new markets abroad – including the U.S.-Canada Free Trade Agreement in the last year of Ronald Reagan's presidency and the North American Free Trade Agreement in the first year of Bill Clinton's. Likewise, both believed that the security of our Latin American neighbors was important to our own national security. They invested much in ensuring that democracy and economic freedom took root and grew in Latin America.

The U.S.-Colombia FTA merits bipartisan support. We also believe that restoring a durable bipartisan consensus on trade requires our leaders to work harder at ensuring that no one gets left behind.

Exports accounted for 40% of America's economic growth in 2007; trade creates jobs, higher wages and lower prices in aggregate terms. Yet people don't live their lives in the aggregate – they live as individuals. The skies may look bright at 40,000 feet, but that's no help to someone struggling to make ends meet on the ground.

That's why those of us who believe in the power of open markets, and who want to see closer ties of trade and investment around the world, need to do more to help workers, families and communities adapt to change. The more we can do to soften trade's blows, the easier it will be to spotlight trade's benefits – which, in the case of the U.S.-Colombia FTA, are substantial and deserve our support.