6
expense of domestic manufacturing workers and social welfare programs (see Bhagwati
2002; Crotty et. al.1996; Krugman 1994). Trade policy would fail to significantly raise
the attention of politicians if the factors of production displaced by imports were
redirected quickly and equitably. However, although it is generally held that trade
liberalization produces net gains for society, it also exposes inefficient segments of the
economy to unrelenting international competition, thereby creating winners and losers in
the domestic economy (see Kapstein 2000; Cline 1997). In response to their economic
plight, those that are negatively impacted by international competition often appeal to
their political representatives for protection or compensation. Furthermore, government
representatives are often held accountable for the state of the domestic economy.
Citizens expect to be protected from the worst attributes of the free market, such
as high unemployment and slow economic growth, and any government or representative
that fails to pay attention to such adverse domestic macroeconomic conditions runs a
serious risk of electoral failure (see Garrett 1998; Lewis-Beck 1988; Key 1967; Downs
1957). As a result, self-interested representatives become more inclined to advocate for
protectionist measures for local firms and interests that come under intense market
competition. Ohio Democratic Representative Tom Sawyer, a vocal supporter of
NAFTA, found himself in a fierce primary election in 2002. The local economy was
slumping and Sawyer’s political opponent, Tim Ryan, argued that NAFTA was a
contributing cause of Ohio’s lethargic economic performance (see New York Times, 25
February 2004). Representative Sawyer ended up losing the primary election.
Owing to the continued debate regarding the benefits of free trade, politicians
often differentiate themselves from opposing candidates by their stance on trade
Convention