The Church on International  Trade

Our Church has what seems to me an ambivalent attitude toward international trade, the social activity which in my view has the greatest potential for moving large numbers of people out of poverty and into the middle class. Nothing has made a greater contribution toward that in the years since WWII than the phenomenal increase in global trade. The church acknowledges that but grudgingly, choosing to focus on potential abuses. It's odd when you consider that none of the themes in Catholic Social Teaching, save only Life and Dignity of the Human Person, gets more emphasis than the Preferential Option for the Poor and Vulnerable. US Bishops say that a basic moral test for society is how we treat the most vulnerable in our midst.

The poor need more than increasing prosperity to be sure but it's a great beginning and nothing promotes prosperity more than trade.

The USCCB mentions trade in its goals for political life, but only in passing reference to overcoming poverty. Trade is listed along with development assistance and debt relief.

The bishops lobby congress on trade issues but doesn't take positions for or against specific agreements. I'm not sure why. They haven't hesitated to take positions on other proposals with moral dimensions. Witness the recent health care bill or the DREAM act. When congress took up legislation last year on three trade agreements the bishops directly addressed only the one with Colombia, and really only to express concern, especially for the rural poor, small farmers, the large number of people displaced by years of strife, and the ongoing violence in Colombia. They quoted Pope Benedict's comment that trade can be good for everyone, and wished the committees well in their work but offered no specific suggestions for the legislation. They adopted a similar posture on agreements with Peru in 2006, and on CAFTA before that.

I wish they would be more proactive. There are provisions that can be written into these agreements to address flaws in things like labor rights, agricultural subsidies, and environmental concerns. The church is right to advocate for those provisions. But more trade at lower tariffs is generally a good thing. It is the most effective tool around for fighting poverty and is one of the few levers we have to address the root causes of illegal immigration, another priority for the USCCB. We should be promoting more trade and promoting it loudly.

So far as I can tell the church has been largely silent on current negotiations for the nine nation Trans Pacific Partnership, though the Maryknoll Fathers and Brothers in Houston are members of the Texas Fair Trade Coalition, a blatantly protectionist organization comprised primarily of organized labor. It's a shame. I wouldn't like to leave the impression that our support for fair trade means we oppose most other forms of trade. We would be in a better position to influence TPP if we were on the inside advocating for the provisions we most want to see in it. I don't see how standing on the sidelines making generalized pronouncements on moral issues helps much.

The Vatican could do more too. I didn't hear much from them last year as the Doha round of global trade talks died a whimpering death. The WTO is the one global organization with mechanisms in place to negotiate trade rules and enforce them. Russia and China have been forced to implement human rights reforms to get membership. Imperfect true, but those are better places to live than before the WTO came along.

The WTO can be a positive influence too in regulating international affairs as we proceed with globalization, something Pope Benedict has repeatedly expressed concern about as the nation state increasingly finds its powers limited. The Pope thinks the UN is the proper forum for that. He's wrong. The WTO would be a better place to start.