From Reuters, reporting on remarks by House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer after his speech today at the National Press Club. “We ought to pass them,” he said of the still-pending Free Trade Agreements with Colombia and Panama. The deal with South Korea needs more work.

“Basically, however, I believe that America can compete with the rest of the world if we have a level and fair trading field. So I’m one of those that believes that trade is helpful and creates jobs over the long run.”

Yes, Hoyer said pretty much the same thing when he spoke to the National Association of Manufacturers last September, but he was right then and he’s right now.

Reporters asked NAM President John Engler about trade today on a conference call about the Milken Institute study, “Jobs for America.” Engler said any discussion about jobs in the President’s State of the Union should embrace trade expansion: “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.”

More on Hoyer’s remarks, with a strangely inclusive lead, from AFP.

Earlier today, Bloomberg moved a larger piece about the Obama Administration’s pallid trade agenda, reporting the disappointment of major exporters like Caterpillar. Also, the following seems like a fair assessment:

[Obama’s] trade agenda remains modest, said William Reinsch, president of the Washington-based National Foreign Trade Council, which represents exporters such as Boeing Co.

There’s a split in the administration between economic advisers who support more trade pacts and political operatives who say doing so would enrage Democratic lawmakers and their union supporters, Reinsch said in an interview.

“So far the political people are winning,” he said.

Yeah. Jobs or politics, politics or jobs.

House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer spoke this a.m. to the National Association of Manufacturers, the NAM’s Public Affairs Steering Committee meeting today at the J.W. Marriott.

His remarks, about 28 minutes worth, were well received: He gave a quick economic overview emphasizing the public’s unease, lauded the President’s speech last night on health care and urged the NAM to work toward health care reform.

The two passages we found notable were his strong endorsement of action on the pending free-trade agreements with Colombia and Panama (Korea’s problematic, he said), and his stressing the need to bring the deficits under control. On trade:

I am very hopeful and I have urged publically some of my friends in my party, in the caucus and around who are somewhat concerned, we ought to pass Colombia and Panama.

Korea is more problematic, mainly because of automobiles and beef. And with beef, you saw the premier tried to solve, the prime minister, tried to solve the beef problem had a very big reaction in his country.

And ….

I’ve told my friends who are not in that place, I said, look, if a manufacturer can make more profit for stockholders, which is their obligation to do, maximize their profits who invested their capital in growing a business, then they’re going to do so.

Just as the shoe manufacturers moved to Massachusetts down to Alabama or South Carolina, or the textile manufacturers moved, people move to where they can best advantage their businesses. You can’t lock people in.

What we can do, however, is to provide for mechanism whereby this international community, this “flat world” that Tom Friedman talks about, we have as level of playing field as we can get. And that means opening up trade. And so I’m a big proponent of Panama and Colombia.

And …

I believe that once we get health care one way or another, I think we’ll going to pass a health care bill, I think we will in fact move on to address trade.

Here’s an .mp3 file of his trade remarks.

From the Wall Street Journal (subscription), “Trade Official Says No Need To Redo Nafta“:

WASHINGTON — The top U.S. trade official said it isn’t necessary to renegotiate the North American Free Trade Agreement, despite a campaign promise by President Barack Obama to strengthen the pact’s labor and environmental provisions.

“The president has said we will look at all options, but I think they can be addressed without having to reopen the agreement,” U.S. Trade Representative Ron Kirk told reporters Monday in a conference call.

From CQ Politics, “Free Trade Returns to the Table“:

On the heels of the Summit of the Americas in Trinidad and Tobago, U.S. Trade Representative Ron Kirk said Monday that a delegation from Panama will visit Washington this week to try to resolve disputes over the U.S.-Panama trade deal. Kirk added that President Obama hopes to clear remaining obstacles to a separate pact with Colombia.

Ultimately, Obama — who met with Colombian President Alvaro Uribe during the summit — believes that “a resolution of the Colombia trade agreement would be a good thing for both economies,” Kirk said.

And Bloomberg, “Obama works to bolster NAFTA.”
Very positive developments, and Ambassador Kirk is doing a fine representing the pro-growth, pro-trade arguments. When the February trade data come out earlier this month, Kirk issued a news release making the case for more trade and trade agreements, “Ambassador Kirk Says Trade Data Underscores Need to Open Markets to U.S. Goods.” There were ways to spin the data into an anti-trade message, but Kirk — and the Obama Administration — chose the pro-trade angle. Which is, of course, the pro-jobs angle, too.

From the White House:

President Bush will welcome President Martin Torrijos of the Republic of Panama to the White House on September 17, 2008. Panama is an important friend and ally of the United States. The President looks forward to discussing a range of issues with President Torrijos, including our common commitment to the United States-Panama Trade Promotion Agreement, expanding free trade and strengthening democracy throughout the region, enhancing security cooperation, and strengthening cooperation in international fora. This visit, following President Torrijos’ visit last May, underscores the on-going deep friendship and cooperation between the United States and Panama.

Greetings from Panama, the other country that has a trade agreement pending with the United States. I will leave hand-wringing over trade to those in Geneva this week - because here it’s awfully hard to find anyone who doesn’t support the idea of free trade and, more specifically, the U.S.-Panama Free Trade Agreement.

Landing yesterday, the plane made a sweep over the Pacific, where I counted 17 container ships lined up on approach to the Canal. Lots of commerce, on its way from Asia to the East Coast and points further east. There was a similar queue on the Atlantic end of the Canal too. This is trade at its most fundemental, and few nations are better positioned to benefit than Panama. The United States and China are the two largest users of the canal.

Having lunch al fresco along the Canal approach, it was hard not to notice the constant procession of PanaMax ships in both directions. You can propose a time-out on trade in Washington, but it’s not going to make a whit of difference here. They’re expanding the Canal in one of the largest public works projects in the world. U.S. Companies stand to benefit greatly from this project - so passing the trade agreement and getting those tariffs removed will be a great thing for lots of manufacturers. More on the Canal tomorrow after our tour.

From nearly any vantage point, Panama City reminds you of Hong Kong, with scores of 50 and 60 story residential towers crowded together. It is a bit surprising to find such a concentration of tall buildings in a small country, but Panama continues to be a big draw for U.S. and European retirees, and is a critical logistics and services center for Latin America. It is predominently on on services economy, including call centers, banking, insurance, and lots and lots of shipping-related business.

Three million people live in this country, about half in Panama City. This is still a developing country, with poverty levels still above 30%. But unemployment is low - below 5%, and GDP is growing. Inflation, particularly food prices, is running about 8-10% this year, I was told this morning. A trade agreement will certainly lower food prices, as agriculture and food tariffs tend to be high.