The Office of the United States Trade Representative recently stepped back from ongoing negotiations on digital trade at the World Trade Organization, citing unsettled domestic policy, and suspended support for digital trade rules in the Indo-Pacific Economic Framework too. But if the U.S. wants to be a part of the conversation, it should reengage and help craft rules flexible enough to meet its future domestic policy needs, writes nonresident fellow Simon Lester.
Despite recent claims that “free trade is dead,” fellow Simon Lester explains that America was never close to anything resembling free trade in the first place. Instead, current U.S. trade policy, just like past policy, reflects a messy mix of free market and industrial policy views.
With the recent enactment of the CHIPS and Science Act, the conversation about industrial policy has started up again. Are state-directed economic policies back, and will such initiatives work?
Legislation regulating commercial transport by ship is impeding economic development and growth, the authors write. Read the post on the Baker Institute Blog.
This post originally appeared in the Forbes blog on April 9, 2020.
Kenneth B. Medlock III, Michelle Michot Foss, Anna B. Mikulska, Ted Loch-TemzelidesApril 9, 2020
In a July 5 referendum, Greeks overwhelmingly rejected the terms of a bailout proposed by international creditors. Baker Institute Rice scholar Ted Temzelides blogs on the surprisingly strong vote against the rescue package, and what may lie ahead.