Debunking Buy America myths
An interesting commentary popped up on our radar earlier this week when the Heritage Foundation turned an even-keeled furrow toward the injustices that are: Buy American clauses attached to federal transportation grants.
The taxpayer, they argue, is suffering, while special interests -- the manufacturing sector and the specter of greedy unions -- are growing fat on rules that require domestic producers to get a first shot in the bidding process.
Critics like to claim that Buy American policies are a recent idea (they aren't), that they violate our international trade agreements (they don't), that our trading partners don’t employ their own domestic procurement requirements (many do), or that they're inflexible and exorbitantly expensive (not so).
Buy America preferences for infrastructure projects aren't there to appease a special interest -- unless the special interest could be described as "the American taxpayer and American businesses that employ American workers." They encourage our tax dollars to stay in country, instead of being sent overseas. They're as commonsense and simple as that.
Related recent Blogs
- The Big Three set the stage for a manufacturing renaissance • by TGarland • 12/10/2013
- Pharmaceutical companies' interests are covered in the TPP -- as for everyone else? Ehh ... • by mmcmullan • 12/09/2013
- A swing and a miss for Biden in Asia • by TGarland • 12/09/2013
- Kickstarting a manufacturing renaissance • by TGarland • 12/06/2013
- U.S. Manufacturing Gains 27,000 Jobs in November: Alliance for American Manufacturing (AAM) Statement. • by scapozzola • 12/06/2013
- Indiana manufacturing program expands • by TGarland • 12/05/2013
- Scott Paul: Keep skilled jobs for skilled workers in Washington • by mmcmullan • 12/05/2013
- A bad time to sideline trade talks • by mmcmullan • 12/04/2013
- Infrastructure investment means job creation • by TGarland • 12/04/2013
- China trade deficit on pace for new record, but will anyone notice? Alliance for American Manufacturing (AAM) Statement. • by scapozzola • 12/04/2013