Mayors
Rise to the Defense of Free Trade
As presidential candidates from both parties attack TPP,
it’s municipal leaders who are offering the most cogent vision of global
engagement.
Carlos Osorio / AP
CHICAGO—Howard A. Tullman, the chief executive officer of the
technology incubator called 1871 doesn’t exaggerate when he calls the bustling
operation “a start-up factory.” Working from a 130,000-foot facility in the
imposing old Merchandise Mart building here, 1871 currently provides office
space, mentoring, courses, and networking opportunities to 425 companies, their
workers hunched over laptops in the cavernous workspace. Firms nurtured by 1871
have created 4,500 jobs since the incubator opened in 2012.
One core service 1871 provides to its tech entrepreneurs is exposure
to like-minded international counterparts. It has established working
relationships with start-up accelerators in cities from Mexico City and London
to Tel Aviv, and regularly brings delegations through to meet with its budding
firms. “We’ve learned that you have to be global from day one,” says Tullman.
“It may take a while. But [our companies] are very sensitive as to how do they
build connections into the big...other markets: China, India, Europe, South
America.”
1871’s default instinct toward global engagement captures a larger
dynamic almost completely obscured in a 2016 presidential race dominated by
criticism of free trade: Mayors and private sector leaders in almost all of
America’s major metropolitan areas believe they can accelerate growth and
expand opportunity by deepening their integration into the world economy, not
retreating from it. “Mayors are becoming much more aware that cities need to be
active participants in the global economy,” says Amy Liu, the director of the
Brookings Institution’s Metropolitan Policy Program. “It’s not just about
connecting their firms to consumer demand through exports. They are also
becoming more focused on what can cities do to position their economies [as]
the destinations for foreign students, foreign firms, and supply chains.”
Particularly
among Democrats, this metropolitan globalism has opened a chasm between the
party’s local and national leadership. In the presidential race, Bernie Sanders
has unreservedly denounced free trade deals like the 12-nation Trans-Pacific
Partnership that President Obama completed last year; Hillary Clinton has
feebly bent in that gale, abandoning her own earlier support for the Pacific
agreement. Far fewer congressional Democrats than in the 1990s are backing free
trade, too.
But
the nation’s mayors—most of them Democrats, especially in the larger cities—
remain overwhelmingly committed to free trade in general and the Trans-Pacific
Partnership in particular. The U.S. Conference of Mayors has officially
endorsed the Pacific pact, and it has drawn enthusiastic praise from big-city
Democratic mayors such as Atlanta’s Kasim Reed, Chicago’s Rahm Emanuel and
Tampa’s Bob Buckhorn.
Buckhorn
sees TPP as a chance to grow the 80,000 jobs the giant Port of Tampa already
provides. The agreement enhances “our ability to sell made in America goods to
largely the Far East via the Panama Canal,” Buckhorn says. “It would be foolish
not to support that.” Other mayors like Emanuel see
opportunities in exporting not only goods but also business services, which
tend to cluster in cities—like the young software engineers congregating at
1871. Completing TPP “is essential for the architects who work here, the
lawyers, the manufacturers, our software developers,” says Emanuel. “Growth for
Chicago’s economy requires more markets to sell into.” Even in places where the
statewide debate favors protectionism, mayors and local leaders in such cities
as Columbus, Ohio, are investing in aggressive strategies to promote exports
and attract foreign talent and investment.
Christopher
Cabaldon, the mayor of West Sacramento, California, since 1998, remembers that
when he first started attending Mayors’ Conference meetings on trade only
mayors from cities with big ports or major exporters would participate. Now,
cities of all sizes recognize their stake in finding their global “niche,” says
Cabaldon, who chairs the Mayor’s Conference committee on jobs. So many cities,
in fact, have successfully tapped global opportunities that Brookings research
shows that the nation’s 100 largest metro areas account for nearly 90 percent
of all U.S. exports and roughly three-fourths of jobs in foreign-owned
companies. The top 118 metro areas also host 85 percent of foreign students.
These
same population hubs are now increasingly indispensable to Democratic political
fortunes. In 2012, Obama amassed more of his total victory margin in just his
100 best counties than any presidential winner since at least 1920. And
Democrats now control the mayor’s offices in virtually all big cities—even in
the reddest states.
Yet in their national debate, Democrats are elevating the
protectionist sentiments of blue-collar workers who largely vote Republican
over the desire for expanded trade in the growing urban centers that now anchor
their electoral coalition. Buckhorn and Cabaldon are two of many mayors
scratching their heads over that calculation.
Both men say the answer to understandable anxieties about
economic change is to provide workers in threatened industries with training to
compete for new jobs—not to renounce opportunities from expanded trade in the
vain hope of protecting existing firms and jobs. Blocking trade agreements,
Cabaldon notes, won’t stop the changes powered by the unrelenting forces of
technological advance and global competition. “The notion that you can just
freeze your metropolitan economy in place right now, or the way it used to be,
is just a fiction we [mayors] can’t live with,” Cabaldon says. “So it’s a
question of what are the tools we have to make the best of the opportunities,
reduce the suffering from the dislocation and then figure out how to compete.”
Neither Sanders nor Clinton has framed the new economic
reality anywhere near so cogently. It’s a special kind of Democratic myopia
that America’s inexorable integration into the global economy looks so much
clearer from the base of the party in the cities than it does from its apex in
the race for the White House.
