Inter-Branch Relations in US Trade Policymaking: Balance of Power or Authoritarian Drift?
This article analyzes the growing interbranch conflicts inherent to the design of US trade policymaking and the search for a balance of power between the legislative and the executive branches amidst recurrent debates on the merits of globalization. To do so, it traces the origins of these instituti...
| Main Author: | |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
Association d'Economie Politique
|
| Series: | Revue Interventions Économiques |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://journals.openedition.org/interventionseconomiques/12616 |
| Summary: | This article analyzes the growing interbranch conflicts inherent to the design of US trade policymaking and the search for a balance of power between the legislative and the executive branches amidst recurrent debates on the merits of globalization. To do so, it traces the origins of these institutional battles and maps out these conflicts across different instruments of the trade policy apparatus. Additionally, it explores the drivers of executive-legislative contention and assesses its complex relations with partisan polarization. The conclusions are two-fold. First, since 1974, under the dual imperative of economic leadership and democratic governance, trade institutions have undergone a bifurcated development where both trade-liberalizing and protective measures developed in both executive and legislative branches. The 1974 Trade Act has played a structuring role in the bicephalous transformation of US trade policymaking, heralding a long legacy of interbranch conflicts amidst stormy debates over globalization and the role that the United States should play in the world economy. Second, in a context of hyperpolarization, institutional mechanisms and legislative reforms can only go so far as to preserve a balance of power necessary to address the tensions between democratic governance and international competitiveness. Beyond the US case, this means that efforts to curtail protectionism cannot be confined to policy recommendations and technocratic solutions, but must address the political and ideological roots of the current globalization fatigue. |
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 0715-3570 1710-7377 |