Doug Goudie, Director of International Trade Policy for the National Association of Manufacturers, has been reporting from a business and trade mission to South Korea.

This will be my last blog from Korea, as we are completing our final day of meetings. It will not be my last blog ON Korea, however – I will be doing a “macro” kind of blog next week on what we might expect leading up to the crucial KORUS FTA deadline of the G20 meeting in Seoul on Nov. 11-12.

I say “deadline” because, really, it is a very important date set by President Obama. Mr. Obama, at the G20 in Toronto in June 2010, announced he was instructing his negotiators to resolve outstanding auto and beef issues with their Korean counterparts. Mr. Obama noted he wanted this done by the Seoul G20 summit so that when he and President Lee meet there, they can conclude the KORUS and declare it final, and President Obama can then send the completed agreement to Congress for approval in the months that follow.

This is key: While not every “i” needs to be dotted and “t” crossed by the end of G20 on KORUS, if there is no agreement and announcement on resolution of autos and beef, it means the KORUS agreement is in trouble, timing-wise. It means a crucial deadline has been missed. If you want an example of what happens when negotiators miss deadlines, take a gander at the last 10 years of the WTO Doha Round.

That’s an extreme example of course — well, we’ve waited over 3 years on KORUS already — but the G20 deadline is key because it will involve the two Presidents, who agreed to this back in June. Their personal involvement will be crucial to achieving a successful resolution. If they cannot, it is doubtful we’ll see agreement soon, and that could impact Congressional movement on KORUS next year.

After our myriad meetings this week, I continue to be confident that there will be agreement on the outstanding provisions and an announcement at the G20 on KORUS, which clears the way for Congressional approval before mid-year 2011.

From the White House, “Remarks by the President Announcing the President’s Export Council“:

To meet this goal, we launched the National Export Initiative -– an ambitious effort to team up with America’s businesses, large and small, and help them unleash their energy and innovation, grow their markets, support new jobs selling their goods and services all across the globe. And we’re bringing to bear the full resources of the United States government.

One of the first things we did was establish an Export Promotion Cabinet made up of Cabinet members and senior administration officials whose work affects exports. Yesterday, I assembled this cabinet for an update on our efforts so far. We’re going to hold these meetings every few months -– and I’ve asked for a progress report at our next meeting in September.

But this is about more than what government can do; this is about what our businesses can do. And that’s why we are re-launching the President’s Export Council, a group that includes business and labor leaders who will offer their unfiltered advice and expertise on how best to promote exports. We’ve also included congressional leaders and senior representatives of my administration.

White House background and list of Export Council members.

Des Moines Register, “Obama names Andringa to export council“: “Mary Andringa, the president and CEO of Vermeer Corp., is one of 18 business executives and labor leaders named to President Obama’s export advisory council today.” Andringa is vice chairman of the National Association of Manufacturers.

Dow Corning news release, “President Obama Appoints Dow Corning CEO Dr. Stephanie A. Burns to President’s Export Council“: “I am proud that Dow Corning is viewed by government officials and the business community as an innovative leader in global business,” said Dr. Burns, whose term lasts until November 2011. “Collaborating with this diverse, experienced and respected group of individuals will be an honor, but more importantly, will help guide the United States for sustainable economic strength.”

From AP, “Obama’s export goals face hurdles here and abroad“:

Obama’s goal of doubling exports by 2015 “is challenging. It’s going to require a very broad set of initiatives,” said Pat Mears, director of international commercial affairs at the National Association of Manufacturers. The group strongly supports Obama’s export goals.

The president’s showcasing of his newly energized trade agenda appeared aimed, in part, at quieting increasing vocal criticism from the business community of his decisions on taxes, trade and financial regulation.

• Bloomberg, “Obama Names Ford CEO Mulally, Disney CEO Iger to Export Council“
• Wall Street Journal, “Obama Shifts to Export-Led Jobs Push“
• New York Times, “Obama Promises Push on Trade Pacts“

Following a bilateral meeting with Korean President Lee Myung-bak in Toronto on Saturday, President Obama announced that the United States Trade Representative will work closely with its counterparts in Korea to resolve pending issues in the U.S.-Korea FTA by November so that the administration could submit the agreement to Congress in the following months. As President Obama said:

I want to make sure that everything is lined up properly by the time that I visit Korea in November. And then in the few months that follow that, I intend to present it to Congress. It is the right thing to do for our country. It is the right thing to do for Korea. It will strengthen our commercial ties and create enormous potential economic benefits and create jobs here in the United States, which is my number one priority.

Great news!  Korea is more than a $300 billion annual import market, and we are on the verge of being shut out as the European Union implements its trade agreement with Korea – so if the President sends the agreement up in early 2011, we will be able to avoid the export and job loss.  The National Association of Manufacturers (NAM) has done its Congressional nose count, and the votes are there.  All that is needed is for the President to say this agreement is in our interest and he wants it passed.

Today is the third anniversary of the Bipartisan Agreement on Trade, “The May 10th Agreement,” a bargain that in return for including enforceable labor and environmental provisions in U.S. trade agreements, those agreements would receive speedy bipartisan support in Congress. But three years later, our trade agreements are still languishing with Colombia, Korea, and Panama.

What a sad anniversary. Nearly 80,000 Americans are unemployed today because of inaction on those agreements (based on International Trade Commission estimates of the additional exports those agreements would bring and Commerce Department estimates of jobs related to trade).

How ironic that the reason for this is organized labor’s refusal to recognize they have been wrong on trade agreements and that our existing trade agreements have actually generated a manufactured goods trade surplus for America. What’s worse, as we have been dead in the water, our chief competitor, the European Union has been busy negotiating its own trade agreements with countries like Brazil, India, Canada, Vietnam, Singapore, etc. –- agreements that will wrap up markets for them and push us out.

President Obama is right in saying we have to double America’s exports in five years, but we can’t do that unless we open foreign markets to our goods and services. This year is the Chinese Year of the Tiger –- but for U.S. trade agreements, every one of the last three years has been The Year of the Snail. It’s time to come out of our shell and open new markets –- starting with those that were supposed to be approved because of the historic bipartisan agreement on trade three years ago.

Secretary of State Hillary Clinton spoke earlier this month at the Energy and Climate Partnership of the Americas (ECPA) Ministerial, hosted by the Inter-American Development Bank. From her remarks, which outlined progress in expanding the use of cleaner-energy technology in the Caribbean, Central America and South America:

Governments and businesses are investing in new technologies and new sources of energy. And these efforts do have global significance. But we have to use our own creativity and our commitment to bring these efforts to scale. We need sustainable and, yes, profitable solutions that bring more and more dollars into the marketplace. And we have a chance to do that – to create not only progress on energy innovation that will save people money, that will use indigenous sources of energy, but which will also help us fight climate change.

Our emphasis.

The United States boasts many outstanding manufacturrers of clean-energy technologies. Their products could be exported more profitably if the White House were to submit U.S. free trade agreements with Colombia and Panama to Congress for enactment, and if Congress were to support these agreements to expand trade opportunities for U.S. manufacturers.

President Obama on Wednesday spoke to the Business Roundtable, the trade association that represents the largest corporations in the United States (and with which the NAM shares many members). In his remarks, the President expressed support for the pending free trade agreements with Panama, Colombia and South Korea.

Now, I know that trade policy has been one of those longstanding divides between business and labor, between Democrats and Republicans. To those who would reflexively support every and any trade deal, I would say that our competitors have to play fair and our agreements have to be enforced. We can’t simply cede more jobs or markets to unfair trade practices. At the same time, to those who would reflexively oppose every trade agreement, they need to know that if America sits on the sidelines while other nations sign trade deals, we will lose the chance to create jobs on our shores. In other countries, whether China or Germany or Brazil, they’ve been able to align the interests of business, workers, and government around trade agreements that open up new markets for them and create new jobs for them. We must do the same. And I’m committed to making that happen.

That’s why we launched the Trans-Pacific Partnership to strengthen our trade relations with Asia, the fastest-growing market in the world. That’s why we will work to resolve outstanding issues so that we can move forward on trade agreements with key partners like South Korea and Panama and Colombia. And that’s why we will try to conclude a Doha trade agreement –- not just any agreement, but one that creates real access to key global markets.

Reuters reported on the speech and reaction, “Obama trade talk cheers business groups,” citing one of the NAM’s specialists in the area:

Doug Goudie, director of international trade policy with the National Association of Manufacturers, said he took seriously the Obama administration’s new focus on trade and much appreciated the goal of doubling exports.

“Moving forward on those three FTAS as soon as possible is going to be the best way to jumpstart the rest of their plan,” such as increasing the number of small- and medium-sized U.S. companies that export, he said.

The Business Roundtable issued a statement summarizing the meeting, with President John Castellani also highlighting trade issues:

We agreed with the President that the United States cannot sit on the sidelines while our competitors negotiate trade agreements that benefit their companies and workers over ours; we discussed the need for Congress to pass the pending free trade agreements as a first step toward the enhanced international trade and investment that is essential to growing the U.S. economy and creating more and better-paying jobs.

The next step for the President is to stop talking about “moving forward” on the FTAs and instead say, “Congress should now enact the pending Free Trade Agreements.”

From the President’s State of the Union:

[We] need to export more of our goods. (Applause.) Because the more products we make and sell to other countries, the more jobs we support right here in America. (Applause.) So tonight, we set a new goal: We will double our exports over the next five years, an increase that will support two million jobs in America. (Applause.) To help meet this goal, we’re launching a National Export Initiative that will help farmers and small businesses increase their exports, and reform export controls consistent with national security. (Applause.)

That’s a welcome target to achieve export-driven growth, and it’s notable that the President regards the export controls issue important enough to warrant a mention.

Correctly so, the NAM believes. The new Milken Institute study, “Jobs for America,” concludes “modernizing U.S. export controls could increase exports in high-value areas. By 2019, these policy adjustments could enhance real GDP by $64.2 billion (0.4 percent), create 160,000 manufacturing jobs, and heighten total employment by 340,000.” The in-depth analysis is here.

The President also reaffirmed the Administration’s oft-stated belief in the value of trade agreements.

We have to seek new markets aggressively, just as our competitors are. If America sits on the sidelines while other nations sign trade deals, we will lose the chance to create jobs on our shores. (Applause.) But realizing those benefits also means enforcing those agreements so our trading partners play by the rules. (Applause.) And that’s why we’ll continue to shape a Doha trade agreement that opens global markets, and why we will strengthen our trade relations in Asia and with key partners like South Korea and Panama and Colombia. (Applause.)

But let’s do more than “strengthen” — let’s ENACT. The President would have helped achieve the goal he had just set by calling on Congress to enact the U.S.-Colombia Free Trade Agreement, the U.S.-Panama Free Trade Agreement, and the U.S.-Korea Free Trade Agreement.

As NAM President John Engler said in a press briefing Monday, “”We believe we absolutely have the votes for the Panama and Colombia agreements.” And… “We think if they’re serious on the jobs front, they have to look at trade. We’ve got a lot of companies that send a big amount of their production abroad for sale.”

House Republican leaders on Thursday sent a letter to President Obama expressing their agreement with his statements of support for expanding U.S. exports to create jobs. Excerpt:

Bipartisan support for implementing trade agreements with Colombia, Panama and South Korea already exists. In the interest of supporting American job creation, we ask that you jump-start the implementation process through your leadership, particularly by promoting all of these pending trade agreements when you speak to the nation in your State of the Union address. We offer our full support for your efforts and look forward to an opportunity to work steadfastly with you to implement each of these agreements as close to the start of next year as possible.

John Engler, president of the National Association of Manufacturers, has an op-ed marking the third anniversary of the signing of the U.S.-Colombia Free Trade Agreement. From The Bradenton Herald, “U.S.-Colombia free trade pact will boost employment, if passed“:

Citing observers and trade advocates, McClatchy Newspapers asks and answers a question, “What’s Obama’s trade policy? So far, there isn’t much of one.” The NAM’s view:

“There is no question that they (the Obama team) have looked at the economic circumstances in which the United States finds itself, and restoring any good degree of wealth means rapid growth in exports, and one way to do that is opening up more markets,” said Frank Vargo, vice president of international affairs for National Association of Manufacturers.

Playing defense on trade and merely “engaging” Asian nations, however, won’t provide much short-term spark to the still-struggling global economy.

Yet …

What bothers the National Association of Manufacturers, however, is the lack of any public push by Obama to score a palpable trade success, such as wrapping up one the pending deals.

“The main difficulty with the administration’s trade policy has been pushing it out into the future,” Vargo said. “It’s just the execution_ particularly in terms of the pending free-trade agreements — that is the problem.”

McClatchy manages a good selection of perspectives in its piece. Investor’s Business Daily just has one perspective in its editorial today on the Obama Administration and the U.S.-Korean trade agreement, expressed with the paper’s usual sharpness. The President expresses support for the trade deal when visiting Korea, but then finds vague reasons inaction. “Double talk on trade,” says IBD.