GOP Support for Trade Retraining Program Angers Conservatives

February 8, 2011 RSS Feed Print
  • Comment (15)

A new effort to revive federal assistance to workers displaced by trade agreements has congressional conservatives ready to be up in arms.

Under the terms of an otherwise obscure provision of U.S. law known as the Trade Adjustment Assistance Program, or TAA, American workers who lose their jobs as the result of foreign trade are declared eligible for federally funded job retraining programs and given a relocation allowance and extended unemployment benefits that are intended to help them find new jobs.

It’s a good sound bite, but it has little basis in economic reality, making it government paternalism at its worst. According to the Heritage Foundation, a conservative think tank in Washington, “TAA job training largely fails to help workers. Studies show that workers who complete TAA job training earn no more afterward than workers who do not.” [Read more stories about unemployment.]

Whether the program is effective is up for debate, as is its reauthorization. Because it is largely a subsidy to unionized workers, it is very important to the Democrats—who depend on organized labor’s money and political support to win elections, which is why the program's coverage was expanded and funding for it was increased as part of the 2009 Obama stimulus legislation. With the program due to expire--and to the chagrin of many conservatives--the new chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee, Michigan Republican Dave Camp, is leading the charge to preserve it. [See who donates the most to Camp.]

Such efforts, which give generous subsidies to supposedly displaced workers, amount to little more than an expensive gift to the labor unions and the Democrats. Very few workers, in relative terms, lose their jobs as the result of new trade agreements, and the U.S. Department of Labor, as many people point out, already provides them with basic services in the event they are displaced. Moreover, the ebb and flow of the U.S. economy leads to a dynamic job market, meaning workers move around a lot— though they change jobs with much less frequency in bad economic times. As Heritage points out, “Competition and innovation constantly create and destroy jobs in America. Shrinking and bankrupt firms eliminate about 2 million existing jobs a month, while new and expanding companies create a similar number of new jobs.”

Even though international trade results in relatively few lost jobs here in the United States, the benefits package created by TAA is far more generous than what other workers who lose their jobs receive. Those benefits, critics say, provide an incentive to stay out of the job market rather than seek new employment—at a cost to taxpayers of $2.4 billion for the program alone. And that’s without considering the reduction in productive economic activity to which these generous subsides lead. [Check out a roundup of political cartoons on the economy.]

Camp’s support for the program's reauthorization does not sit well with other congressional Republicans, sources on Capitol Hill say, particularly not with the large class of freshmen who believe they were elected with a mandate to cut spending and enact policies that will lead to job creation rather than subsidize unemployment. Extending the program, critics say, is not just bad policy—it’s also bad politics. It amounts to a gift to the Democrats without receiving anything substantial in return. The best way to create jobs is to enact policies that lead to job creation—like cutting taxes, reducing government spending, keeping inflation down, and making the decision to hire more workers a rational one rather than one that is merely optimistic, or one that relies on government subsidies for new hiring to make economic sense. This retraining program does none of these things, making the GOP leadership’s support for it quite surprising indeed.

Tags:
Democratic Party,
Dave Camp,
international trade,
deficit and national debt,
Republican Party,
unemployment

Reader Comments Read all comments (15)

Add Your Thoughts
Your comment will be posted immediately, unless it is spam or contains profanity. For more information, please see our Comments FAQ.

Government needs to get out of the retraining business.

Close all government retraining programs and re allocate that money to the private sector, giving that money to American companies to train Americans to fill their respective positions.

One hundred percent of the money would go only, to the training of American workers.

It is our money and we should have the say...

David O Powell of FL 11:20AM March 04, 2011

This is just one more excuse to spend tax payer money!

One more boondoggle. What don't you get?

We need jobs..jobs....jobs!

What is this about except our elected officials are totally from another planet.

They have no idea how the real world works.

Time we all gave them some lessons.

Anyone who votes these idiotic programs and keeps spending tax payer money will be looking for a job come election time.

The game is over Republicans..we voted you in and we can certainly vote you out!

We intend to keep your feet to the fire and that includes Boehner, West and the rest who think they are safe!

marylou of VA 3:58PM February 14, 2011

Having worked in the field and helped many clients thread the hoops of both the WIA and the TAA programs, I can say unequivocally that they do make a positive difference. I've looked at the study in question and it does not compare TAA recipients with those who have not received services, it compares them with those who have received WIA funding and the differences are not statistically significant between the two. Also, I do not recall anyone in the program getting helped who was a union member. There may have been some, but so what?

Conservatives gnash their teeth about unions, but IMHO the reason the average American's wages have stagnated for the last thirty or forty years is because of the extent to which unions have been marginalized and because of the trade policies our corporatist politicos have set up for us. Most of their jobs have been sent overseas with our taxpayer help.

To say that helping people obtain training for more viable occupations does not work is nonsense; it's a variation on a meme. De-funding education, job training and government employees to help those peoppl who are out of work and need a leg up is counterproductive to a working society, especially one that is so far behind the eight ball as ours.

BTW, according to factcheck.org, the federal budget balanced and the federal deficit erased during the Clinton years, with or without Social Security. And please leave SS alone!

Enobie of AK 10:07PM February 13, 2011

Peter Roff

Peter Roff

Peter Roff is a contributing editor at U.S. News & World Report. Formerly a senior political writer for United Press International, he’s now affiliated with several public policy organizations including Let Freedom Ring, and Frontiers of Freedom. His writing has appeared in National Review, Fox News’ opinion section, The Daily Caller, Politico and elsewhere. Follow him on Twitter @PeterRoff.

advertisement

Robert Schlesinger

An End to the NRA’s Angry Swagger

Polls show that overwhelming majorities of Americans, and even of NRA members, favor universal background checks.

Mary Kate Cary

Washington’s Toxic Stew

President Obama's burgeoning problems affect more than this week’s three scandals.

Latest Videos

advertisement