1988 Ad

The Candidates on the Issues

The AFL-CIO asked 14 declared and potential candidates for the Democratic and Republican Party presidential nominations in the 1988 election to respond in writing to four questions on key issues. The goal is to help our members and their families exercise their civic rights and responsibilities, to become more involved in deciding which candidate or candidates offer the standard of leadership this nation seeks.

The American standard of living is under attack. Persistent unemployment and lower pay scales have strained family budgets. Consumer purchasing power is eroding. The good jobs that formed the basis for a stable middle class are disappearing in the face of intense and often unfair foreign competition. At the same time, as the federal role has been reduced, an increased burden is being placed on state and local governments to provide community services and to rebuild deteriorating public facilities.

As the proper role for government continues to be the subject of national debate, American workers and their unions are deeply concerned about the need to provide better jobs, improved education, equal opportunity for all, affordable housing, access to health care, and all the elements necessary to give the next generation a chance at a better life than its parents.

These concerns are the basis for the AFL-CIO's questions, which appear below and on the following pages with the candidates' responses.

QUESTION 1

FOREIGN TRADE

How would you propose to reduce America's trade deficit and encourage the fair exchange of goods with other nations, while maintaining and improving our standard of living?

DEMOCRATS

Bruce Babbitt

Free traders tell us, in the face of all the evidence, that there is nothing basically wrong with the system of international trade. Protectionists want to pick fight after fight about unfair trading practices and start an unending cycle of retaliation.

My approach is a third alternative entirely. I call it balanced trade. Balanced trade concentrates on objective results ("balance') rather than subjective rules (such as "fairness') which different nations interpret differently.

Balanced trade means simply that every industrial country must keep its multilateral trading accounts, the sum total of all its foreign trade, in approximate balance. If you export, you import, and you do it in equal measure. The overall value of what you sell to the world must match the overall value of what you buy. If that is not the case, and you won't balance your accounts, then your victims will balance them for you--with across-the-board tariffs that increase every year.

That is balanced trade. It is a new idea in recognition of an old value: overall parity between exports and imports. All it needs is a President who is bold enough to make it happen.

Joseph R. Biden Jr.

Today's world is more complicated than the simplistic choice between free trade and protectionism. Free trade is a myth--something that never existed. And protectionism would be self-destruction --a trade war now would be like a nuclear war: there would be no winners.

Both options are defeatist. Free traders say we are powerless to change our future. Protectionists say we cannot compete against our rivals and win.

Our next President must respond to unfair foreign trade practices, not with talk, but action. He should sit down with trading partners and put "all the cards on the table': negotiating with them over trade practices, military and foreign aid support, and the value of our currencies. If needed, the President should impose tariffs on those who are unwilling to be fair traders.

Our goal must be not withdrawing from world competition but entering it to win. Management is going to have to worry more about building industry for the next decade, and less about next quarter's profits. Management must give workers more say in how industries are run and a share of the profits: workers must accept this responsibility and help America increase productivity and product quality.

Finally, we should not ignore the human costs of trade problems. As President, I would use tariff proceeds to fund worker retraining and relocation. And I would support ideas like wage insurance, plant closing laws, and community tax base insurance.

I don't want America to withdraw from world trade--nor do I want us to concede defeat to our rivals. Instead, I want us to prevail in the world economy, and I know that we can.

Michael S. Dukakis

The trade deficit has cost two million jobs, betraying the hopes and dreams of families and communities across our nation. Debating "protectionism' versus "free trade' misses the point. Our goal must be competitive American industries and balanced trade internationally.

Some say America must de-industrialize. I disagree. We need our basic industries. Our national security cannot become hostage to raw materials purchased, processed and manufactured abroad.