Luntz 2006: International Trade

In the fourth installment of the text version of the Luntz Republican playbook, Frank reveals his thoughts on 'leveling the international playing field' so our apparently hapless businesses can finally compete in the global marketplace. (Last I knew, our 11 trillion dollar economy dwarfed its next closest international competitor. Maybe Luntz knows something we don't?)

Fair Use Notice

This site contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democracy, scientific, and social justice issues, etc. We believe this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. For more information go to: law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use', you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.

PAGE 37 ---

INTERNATIONAL TRADE: PROMOTING AMERICA’S COMPETITIVENESS

-- President George W. Bush

THE ELEVEN STEPS TO EFFECTIVE TRADE COMMUNICATION

There was a time when virtually all conservatives considered themselves “free traders.” Today, views over trade are no longer so simple or easily defined -- and while a majority of Americans are still free traders in theory, their language and priorities have changed. For those who believe that an aggressive effort to promote exports is essential to an expanding American economy, the following communication recommendations should be helpful:

1) It’s “INTERNATIONAL” trade, NOT “foreign” trade or “global” trade. For many reasons unrelated to this issie, the word “foreign” conjures up very negative images. Since Americans are more “pro-international” than they are “pro-foreign” or “pro- global” (globalization is a particularly frightening term to many Americans), we suggest you accept this terminology. INTERNATIONAL trade is favored over FOREIGN trade by 68% of Americans.

2) “A level playing field” is what Americans want, expect and demand from international trade. This is the only issue we have studied where the process is as important as the result. The level playing field concept is what Americans believe is the fundamental principle behind trade expansion and new trade agreement. This is how we currently define “free and fair trade.”

3) Jobs are what Americans most want from international trade. Even though most companies and many in the Administration make the case for cheaper products and more choices, in the current economic climate, what matters most is the number of jobs created by trade and/or jobs lost because of it. If you are a proponent of greater trade, you will need to use employment facts/statistics to prove that trade yields a net positive number of jobs. A majority of Americans are still not sure.

4) Appeal to America’s greatness. Americans love being told we’re the best, that we’re number one. We will do anything -- ANYTHING -- to remain number one, and will oppose anything that undermines that superiority. It is essential in any discussion of trade to declare that we are “the greatest economic power in the world” and that “we will remain the greatest economic power in the world only so long as we continue to do business with other nations.”

PAGE 38 ---

5) When it comes to competition, WINNING is the only acceptable outcome. Other than the Germans, we are probably the most competitive population on the globe, and we take economic competition just as seriously as sports or politics. As long as Americans believe we can and will win in the global markets, they will want to play. However, winning is not defined by “balance of payments” or by “trade deficit figures.” The public does not care about how many foreign products are sold in America. Winning is determined by our ability to get our products into foreign markets and keep our economy healthy. And those who oppose international trade should be called “defeatists” for they have given up on our products and our workers without even a fight.

6) The Overarching trade objective is “ENHANCEMENTS.” Americans are skeptical of “trade expansion” because they’re not really sure whether our companies, products and employees are truly benefiting from additional trade, and “promotion” also fails to address the perceived systematic shortcomings. Enhancement is about the quality of the agreements, not just the quantity -- and that’s exactly what Americans want to see.

7) “Fairness” is the strongest weapon in the anti-trade arsenal. The primary reason why about a third of the population (and the percentage is growing) opposes free trade is because they think our competitors are not competing fairly. That’s why the “fairness” component must be a part of any communication strategy -- talking about putting U.S. businesses “on an even footing” or “guaranteeing a level playing field” or about “fair trade, NOT just free trade” is essential to winning the trade argument.

8) The best financial statistic: expanding international trade is the equivalent of a $1300 to $2,000 tax cut for the average American family. Americans like to save money, particularly those who shop at Target, Wal-Mart and the other stores most likely to offer foreign-made products. The problem is, while consumers see the benefits every day — right in their own wallets and pocketbooks — of less expensive imported products, they do not recognize why prices are cheaper and selection greater. You need to explain it better by making a DIRECT connection through the statistic above.

9) High-wage Jobs, highly-skilled workers and high-tech products are more important than trade deficit numbers. We asked Americans whether a country that has low-wage jobs, low-skilled workers, and produces labor-intensive products but has a large trade surplus is better off than a country that has high-wage jobs, highly-skilled workers, and high-tech products but a large trade deficit. The answer was a resounding NO for two reasons. First, many people confuse the trade deficit with the budget deficit (“they’re all just numbers … big numbers”) and their eyes glaze over. Second, most Americans truly would rather live in a high-wage, highly-skilled, high-tech country. So don’t forget to name the many foreign companies that have opened facilities that employ significant numbers of Americans (Honda, Toyota, and BMW manufacturing plants, for example).

10) Don’t forget American farmers. No profession’s members care more about selling American products abroad than do American farmers, because no one has more at stake. In fact, if we are to save the farm economy, it is essential that we expand markets abroad for American agricultural products. Let farmers know that you’re fighting for them in the capitals of Europe and Asia, not just in Washington.

PAGE 39 ---

11) Don’t talk like economists. Words like “protectionist,” “capitalist” and “isolationist” turn the average voter off. In this case, I am sorry to say that emotion beats intellect. All your facts must ring true, but they should be couched in terms that appeal to our hearts as well as our heads.

OVERVIEW

-- Robert Zoellick

There is no issue we have ever messaged where both sides can legitimately use much of the same language yet come to radically different conclusions. From jobs to compliance to level playing fields, those that would slam the door on international trade often use exactly the same buzz words and occasionally even the same data as trade expansion advocates. George Orwell is alive and well.

Moreover, the day-to-day impact of international trade (or the lack of) is not immediately apparent to most Americans. For example, despite the best efforts of Democrats to obscure the financial bite of government, everyone can see and feel the imposition of taxes on a personal basis every time they purchase something or receive a paycheck. The benefits from trade are not so obvious. Americans can plainly see the sales tax penalty they pay on their cars and televisions, but there is no line item for all the dollars saved because American companies can produce and sell their products elsewhere. And the same people who decry the trade deficit during the day drive home in their BMWs at night listen to their Italian operas on their B&O speakers and fall asleep in front of their Sony TVs -- and they wouldn’t have it any other way.

You start this debate at a disadvantage. Yes, the American people are generally in favor of expanding international trade -- but that is misleading. The moment opponents push back with any of several arguments in their linguistic quiver, trade support collapses. Consider the following polling results from late 2003 at the bottom of the economic cycle:

* 63% believe “We should slow things down and make sure others are playing fairly before we negotiate any more trade agreements”

* 63% believe “The United States should not pursue any new foreign trade agreements until we insure that the current trade agreements are fair to the U.S. and working effectively.

PAGE 40 ---

* 66% believe “NAFTA and other foreign trade agreements have cost thousands of American workers their jobs, and right now we have a trade deficit of almost $500 billion dollars. Before we pursue any new agreements, we need to guarantee that the U.S. is competing on a level playing field and these agreements are followed by other nations.”

TRADE PROMOTION: SOUND-BITES OF SUCCESS.

* American companies and products are losing sales opportunities and market share because we are competing at a disadvantage in the world marketplace. International trade agreements will create and ensure the level playing field we need to compete and win.

WORDS THAT WORK

Americans have nothing to be afraid of when we compete on the world stage. So long as the rules are fair and we prepare our work force to make products that the world will buy, we can win.

PAGE 41 ---

Those polling results should be alarming to supporters of free trade. But there is good news for 2005:

* 69% currently believe that "the American economy benefits from international trade."

* 64% believe "when it comes to trade, America can compete and win against any country on the globe."

That's why the words and language you use are so important if you want to convince an increasingly skeptical American population.

THE LANGUAGE OF TRADE EXPANSION

Trade is one issue where explaining the policy is as important as explaining the principles. We need an education effort that goes beyond language training right to the heart of good economic policy. The following trade agenda, as articulated by former Commerce Secretary Don Evans, serves as a good summary of policy and objectives:

(1) We will seek the elimination of industrial tariffs. Ending industrial tariffs will decrease prices all the way down the line, with consumers benefiting the most.

(2) We will place a special focus on eliminating barriers to exports of agricultural products precisely because it is the area most subject to government intervention that distorts markets, limits the opportunities for American farmers, and impoverishes fanners throughout the developing world.

(3) We win press for the elimination of all barriers to the export of U.S. services, which now represent the largest sector in the U.S. economy. We have the best minds and abilities, and we must be free to compete on the world stage.

(4) We are committed to keeping electronic commerce free of roadblocks on the global information highway.

(5) We intend to ensure respect for intellectual property rights that protect the ideas that lie at the heart of the rise in American productivity.

(6) We are committed to preserving our ability to deter unfair trade practices and to pursue the aggressive enforcement of our trade agreement rights.

All of these objectives fall under the same basic premise - that governments should eliminate the barriers of £ee enterprise in order to offer their people the opportunity to define their own economic destiny.

PAGE 42 ---

Fairness

I begin with the "fairness" argument because it is at the very core of the anti-trade argument. Like clockwork, opponents to trade always return to the same refrain that recent agreements are unfair to workers, unfair to certain American industries, and unfair to America.

In some ways they're right. American products ARE charged higher taxes at foreign borders. Yes, that's unfair. Acknowledge their premise, but then challenge their conclusion and solution. You will win the fairness argument by demonstrating that it is actually the lack of trade agreements that is the cause of unfair practices against American companies, products, and most importantly, American workers.

And a villain always helps. Our polling indicates that 31% of Americans see China as the country that ignores agreements and breaks rules the most often. They are the number one response by a long shot, and it approached with some degree of sensitivity, could function as a stunningly effective foil when talking about fairness.

WORDS THAT WORK

The answer is to fight back with trade agreements that remove all these taxes and tariffs and put America on an equal playing field. If we retreat - if we surrender - we lose. But if we act quickly and aggressively, if we assert the right of America to compete, we will gain the higher ground - and that means we win.

The language of "a level playing field,” though somewhat hackneyed and cliché, wins every time. It appeals to American's sense of fairness - just look no further than the recent uproar over steroids in baseball. In the minds of this country, a fair playing field allows the best player to win. Furthermore, this language ultimately translates into an American win, because of our sense of America being exceptional. It is no surprise then that when polled, 48% of Americans believe that "a level playing field for every trading nation is the most important outcome of America's trading policy with the rest of the world, beating two other arguments that encapsulate the concept of winning.

Thus, it isn't "winning" alone that motivates voters to free trade; it is instead fairness that sets the stage for a win.

PAGE 43 ---

Everyone Loves a Winner

Once you have set up a fairness principle, you can then move into more salutary language centered upon wining. Of all the emotional arguments in favor of trade expansion, nothing ultimately stirs Americans more than an appeal to America's greatness. From the fundamental core belief in American exceptionalism to the enduring American Dream that is passed on from one generation to the next, there is something unique about America and our drive to be the best at what we do both as individuals and as a nation. Nothing is more pleasing to the American ear than to be told that we are the first and the best.

WORDS THAT WORK

Americans have always been at the forefront of international change and world progress and we have always prospered as a result. That is what has made us such a forward-looking nation. We must continue to lead in a world that is more active than ever in trade and commerce, and we should do this in a way that provides opportunities to all American workers, business owners and families.

The key word is winning. According to your opponents, the only winners over the past decade of trade expansion are foreign governments, foreign products, and multinationals. Everyone else has been a loser. Nothing is further from the truth, of course, but Americans don't know this. It is essential that you capture the theme of winning and insert it into all your communication efforts. It is essential that you itemize and specify the real winners when we open the door to international trade.

In fact, winning is one of the top responses to poll questions asking Americans to identify the most important benefit to America from trading with other nations, second only to "creating more American jobs." Almost half of all American voters chose "enhancing America's ability to compete and win economically against other nations" as their first or second choice.

WORDS THAT WORK

The President must be allowed to assert his leverage on behalf of America's farmers and ranchers, industries and service providers, small and large businesses, workers and families alike. When American businesses are able to engage and compete with the rest of the world on an even footing, everyone one is a winner.

PAGE 44 ---

TRADE OUTCOMES THAT MATTERS MOST TO AMERICANS

Creating more jobs for Americans ~ 49%
Enhancing America-'s ability to compete and win ~ 45%
More choices of products and services ~ 31%
Saving money on consumer items ~ 27%
Creating higher wages for American jobs ~ 25%

The Economy

The general economic impact of trade is rarely, if ever, a strong argument, but with Americans just barely receiving their first taste of a more robust economy, they are looking for any bright light to hold o,to.

The problem with the economic argument four years ago remains today.

1) First, the impersonal nature of “the economy" loses every time to the more personal appeal of (lost) jobs and (lower) wages.

2) Second, a rather large number of Americans believe NAFTA and other trade agreements have actually had a negative impact on the economy. Sadly, 54% of Americans believe that overall, NAFTA has been a failure, while only 44% believe that overall, it has been a success.

So while trade expansion may be the panacea the economy needs to right itself, the public is more likely to side with the textile and auto workers who lost their jobs.

Ironically, Americans agree that free trade agreements benefit both America (68%) and the American economy (69%), even though they have a negative impression of NAFTA. So when you talk about free trade, address the principle, not the specifics. And if you are faced with an economic challenge from the opposition" the ‘correct’ answer is to focus on building, increasing, expanding - moving forward, doing more ....

WORDS THAT WORK

This is the time to be opening new markets, not slamming doors on opportunities that could build on and rejuvenate our economic growth. To me, opponents of trade sound like defeatists. They want to retreat. We want to move ahead. We want to tear down the walls and move forward, building new markets, increasing economic opportunities; expanding our natural advantages.

PAGE 45 ---

Of course, there are effective ways to talk about the economy's beneficial relationship with trade ... the only difficulty in it is matching the aplomb of the Governator himself:

SCHWARZENEGGER WORDS THAT WORK

Now they say India and China are overtaking us. Don't you believe it! We may hit a few BUMPS - but America always moves ahead! That's what Americans do!

In what was one of the most memorable moments of the convention, Governor Schwarzenegger combined a discussion of the economy with the language of winning. and thoroughly succeeded. This section consistently tests off the charts, and I assure you that it is NOT solely a response to the "economic girlie men" line. It is a response to Schwarzenegger's "pumping up" of American exceptionalism. So talk about the economy, but talk about it in terms of perseverance, stamina, and winning.

The Facts About Jobs

Frankly, this is where trade advocates have fallen down. The facts may be on your side but the perceptions are not, and this is exactly what Americans want to hear about above everything else. Remember half of Americans (49%) picked "creating more jobs for Americans as one of the most important benefits of trading with other nations - more than any other outcome. Of course this is not as easy as it sounds:

* Trade may support tens of millions of jobs here at home, but no one knows which jobs they are.

* Trade may produce a net positive number of jobs, but thanks to organized labor Americans think otherwise.

* Trade related jobs may pay 12% to 15% more on average than other jobs, but again, no one knows – including those who hold those jobs;

PAGE 46 ---

This is one area where you need a litany of facts to bolster your arguments. Rattle off four or five specific, relevant examples of how trade has• increased not only the number of jobs but the quality of jobs in a specific industry. The key principle here is the future and can be stated in a single sentence that Americans win appreciate and agree:

THE TRADE PHRASE THAT PAYS

High wage, highly skilled workers producing high-tech products is the key to America's economic future.

When talking about jobs, acknowledge that trade enhancement will mean importing more items like toys and clothes, but then emphasize that American consumers will benefit with more choices and lower prices. And then close with the following: “But with trade enhancement, we will be exporting aircraft engines, tractors, heavy equipment, and advanced technology. That means more jobs, good jobs, better jobs for more people."

The key to the job argument involves two of the most popular and credible professions in America, farmers and small business owners. Both professions are considered the embodiment of the American Dream. Both professions depend on international trade for their existence.

WORDS THAT WORK

Trade agreements are particularly important to small businesses. They need straightforward rules because they don't have the lawyers to work through the bureaucracy. They need the power of the U.S. government because they don't have the infrastructure to fight for equal treatment. They need the opportunity of open markets because they cannot afford to open them themselves. And no one understands this more than the American farmer - America's first small business owners.

More Choices, Lower Prices.

Trade enhancement advocates should be spending more time advancing the choice and price argument because opponents have no credible response. Use rhetorical questions:

* Should Americans be denied the right to choose the products that are best for them? That's what will happen if we discontinue international trade.

* Doesn't the average American family deserve to keep $1,300 to $2,000 in savings because of international trade? That’s the real benefit of international trade.

PAGE 47 ---

International Impact

Proponents of trade often turn to the international impact of trade on employment, opportunities, environmental quality, and even the spread of democracy and the free market system to other nations on the globe. You can emphasize this: "we pay higher wages, adhere to stricter environmental standards, and provide better worker safety and training than locally owned factories in poor countries." The fact that 140 million people worldwide have been raised from poverty so far is well worth mentioning. Furthermore the fastest reductions in poverty have come in those countries most engaged in trade, while countries that isolate themselves remain desperately poor.

BUT while the international argument sounds good and Americans of all stripes do approve, this is one of the weakest arguments in your communication arsenal. Americans do like to hear about how economic and political policies here can have a positive impact on people across the globe, but that will accomplish nothing if you are confronted with trade deficit numbers, job losses, or lack of compliance. The language below captures the best of the international impact argument, but beware -- this is not one that knocks it out of the park.

WORDS THAT WORK

By leading, the United States can shape the future. By leading, the United States is guiding the merger of regional integration within a new, open global system. By leading, the United States can help create models of liberalization that we can then apply elsewhere. We have an unparalleled opportunity here. By dint of size and ingenuity and creativity and capital markets, we can really influence the future of the international system. To have our hands tied at this moment would be a historic calamity.

-- Robert Zoellick

Trade Arguments That Don't Work

There are two particular arguments advanced by the Bush Administrtion in favor of trade that don't work among any audience - frind or foe. Those arguments are:

* The number of agreements. There are now more than 130 free-trade agreements in force around the world, and the U.S. is party to only a handful of them. This may have real, quantifiable consequences for American workers and companies, but absolutely no one cares. In polling, focus groups, and dial sessions, this is singularly the least effective method to sell enhanced world trade.

* The role of Congress. It is the result, not the process that matters to Congress. Trade advocates emphasize that Congress sets the negotiating objectives for trade agreements… Congress oversees the executive branch during negotiations ... Congress ultimately decides whether to accept or reject the agreement. And yes, the American people do want Congress involved. But they are much more interested in jobs, products and cheaper prices than what Congress does or does not do.

The "level playing field" argument is truly a double-edged sword. Both sides in the trade debate argue for a level playing field because it cuts to the heart of the "fairness" attribute and therefore to the center of the public opinion battle. Make no mistake: whichever side argues more effectively that its position will yield a level playing field will win the public opinion battle.

The best response is the language below. First, take the level playing field argument as your own. Assert that the lack of international trade is what creates an uneven playing field. Second, assert that through negotiations and agreements, we can and will establish a "fair" basis for competition. And third, with that fair basis for competition, America can and will win.

WORDS THAT WORK

The other critical ingredient is a level playing field and the need to keep competition truly competitive. If the playing field is tilted against our companies and our workers, as we're seeing in the steel industry, no matter how good the product, we won't be able to compete. We can't be playing in a zero sum game on the global stage. That's not what this is all about. Through international negotiations, we will forge agreements that create and ensure a level playing field, so that competition is fair and so everyone bas the opportunity to win. We will accept nothing less.

-- Former Commerce Secretary Don Evans

Enforcement and compliance also cut both ways. First, even though the words "enforcement" and "compliance" are used interchangeably, there is a different connotation to the American ear. While Americans are unhappy when they learn that other nations are not complying with the rules of international trade, they get outright angry if they are told that the American authorities are not enforcing those rules - to the detriment of U.S. workers, U.S. companies and the U.S. economy.

Let me be blunt. There is a real perception that our leaders, Republicans and Democrats alike, sell out American interests to foreign companies. The answer to this challenge is as much in the tone as in the language: pounding fists is as important as well crafted phrases.

PAGE 48 ---

Americans want crafty negotiators determining trade agreements and street fighters enforcing them. The following language will not work if delivered with a calm demeanor.

WORDS THAT WORK

And third, we must have the teeth and the resources to guarantee that compliance.

Creating effective trade language that avoids the subject's more arcane components is an enormous challenge even to the most skilled communicator. By relying on principles rather than punditry, you can rally Americans to your side.

THE PERFECT SOUNDBITE

WITH THE BEST WORKERS AND THE BEST PRODUCTS ON THE GLOBE, AND WITH TOUGH NEGOTIATORS FIGHTING FOR THE BEST AGREEMENTS, AMERICA WINS.

PAGE 49 ---

THE BENEFITS OF INTERNATIONAL TRADE
(A Republican speech about expanding opportunities)

With the best workers and the best products on the globe, and with tough negotiators fighting for the best agreements, the United States cannot lose. So let's not allow the old ways of thinking and the old politics of fear to hamper desperately needed and deserved progress. International trade doesn't depend on abstract economic theory. International trade is about more jobs, good jobs and lower prices, and is essential to retaining our economic leadership in the world.

Frank Luntz Republican Playbook (New American Lexicon) -- Searchable Text-Version

• PART I "Introduction"
  
• PART II "Setting the Context and Tone"
  
• PART III "Growth, Prosperity, & Restore Energy and Economic Security"
  
• PART IV "International Trade: Promoting America's Competitiveness"
  
• PART V "The Budget: Ending Wasteful Washington Spending"
  
• PART VI "Tax Relief & Simplification"
  
• PART VII "Social Security = Retirement Security" (Part a)
  
• PART VII "Social Security = Retirement Security" (Part b)
  
• PART VIII "Lawsuit Abuse Reform: A Commonsense Approach"
  
• PART IX "An Energy Policy for the 21st Century"
  
• PART X "Appendix: The 14 Words Never to Use"
  

Also Available in:
PDF
Word 2003 (671kb)
RTF (908kb)
RTF (zipped--185kb)
XML (1.53mb)