Trade Policy is Back in the News: Will Voters Care?
-
Alexandra Guisinger
Abstract
During the 2016 election cycle, both Donald Trump and Bernie Sanders received roars of approval from supporters when discussing plans to roll back decades of trade liberalization and more specifically North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA). In the past, protectionist politicians who failed to follow through on promises paid little electoral cost, arguably because NAFTA received relatively little media or political attention after it was passed. Now in the spotlight, could trade policies cost President Trump voters in 2020? I argue that the highly partisan nature of today’s trade discourse – a new dimension for trade opinion – creates obstacles for electoral accountability because preferences follow rather than drive partisanship. Drawing on previous research and a 2017 survey experiment fielded before and after Trump’s trip to China, I show that the ability of trade messaging to cross party lines has weakened and that Trump’s followers strongly react to information cues from Trump but fail to react to information based accusations of flip flopping on his most prominent trade related promise: increased protection against China. The ability of politicians to shape preferences rather than respond to the will of constituents calls into question the electoral connection on critical government policies even when they become salient.
Appendix A: Survey Questions
Beliefs about trade benefits [Grid format]
The US government continues to expand opportunities to trade through bi-lateral and multi-lateral agreements with foreign countries. What do you believe has been the effect of trade on the following:
| Rows: |
| Your employment |
| Employment in your region |
| Employment in the US |
| Columns: |
| <1> Benefit Greatly |
| <2> Benefit Slightly |
| <3> No Difference |
| <4> Hurt Slight |
| <5> Hurt Greatly |
| <6> Don’t know |
Standard ANES Question
Some people have suggested placing new limits on foreign imports in order to protect American jobs. Others say that such limits would raise consumer prices and hurt American exports. What do you think? Do you favor or oppose placing new limits on imports – or haven’t you thought much about this?
| Favor |
| Oppose |
| Haven’t thought much about this |
Trump Approval Question and Treatment Conditions
[China]
During his campaign, President Trump pledged to come down hard on China, promising to increase tariffs on Chinese goods to 45%.
After his return from Asia last Wednesday, President Trump announced stronger economic engagement with China saying “In China, we also announced $250 billion worth in trade-investment deals that will create jobs in the United States.”
[Japan]
During his campaign, President Trump pledged to come down hard on Japan, noting “When did we beat Japan at anything? They send their cars over by the millions, and what do we do? When was the last time you saw a Chevrolet in Tokyo?”
After his return from Asia last Wednesday, President Trump announced stronger economic engagement with Japan saying “Japanese manufacturers, Toyota and Mazda, announced that they will be opening a new plant in the United States that will create 4000 jobs.”
[Or South Korea]
During his campaign, President Trump pledged to come down hard on South Korea, promising to renegotiate the US Korean Free Trade agreement so as to retain the “the tariffs South Korea presently pays us to sell their stuff in our country.”
After his return from Asia last Wednesday, President Trump announced stronger economic engagement with South Korea saying “Last week, 42 South Korean companies announced their intent to invest in projects worth more than $17 billion dollars in the United States, and 24 companies announced plans to purchase $58 billion dollars in American goods and services.”
Do you approve or disapprove of President Trumps performance in office?
| <1> Strongly Approve |
| <2> Somewhat Approve |
| <3> Not Sure |
| <4> Somewhat Disapprove |
| <5> Strongly Disapprove |
References
Aldrich, John H., Christopher Gelpi, Peter D. Feaver, Jason Reifler, and Kristin Thompson Sharp. 2006. “Foreign Policy and the Electoral Connection.” Annual Review of Political Science 9: 477–502.10.1146/annurev.polisci.9.111605.105008Search in Google Scholar
American National Election Studies. 1986–2012. Time Series Study [Data Set]. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan, Center for Political Studies. http://www.electionstudies.org.Search in Google Scholar
American National Election Studies. 2010. Time Series Cumulative Data File [Data Set]. Stanford University and the University of Michigan http://www.electionstudies.org.Search in Google Scholar
Ansolabehere, Stephen A. 2007. “Cooperative Congressional Election Study, 2006.” Common Content. Release 2: November 14, 2007. Cambridge, MA: M.I.T. http://projects.iq.harvard.edu/cces.Search in Google Scholar
Ansolabehere, Stephen A. 2008. “Guide to the 2006 Cooperative Congressional Election Survey.” Data Release No. 2. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University.Search in Google Scholar
Ansolabehere, Stephen A. 2010. “Cooperative Congressional Election Study, 2010.” Common Content. Release 3: August 10, 2012. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University. http://projects.iq.harvard.edu/cces.Search in Google Scholar
Ansolabehere, Stephen A. 2011. “Cooperative Congressional Election Study, 2008.” Common Content. Release 2. Cambridge, MA: M.I.T. http://hdl.handle.net/1902.1/14003.Search in Google Scholar
Ansolabehere, Stephen A., and Brian Schaffner. 2012. “Cooperative Congressional Election Study, 2012.” Cambridge, MA: M.I.T. http://hdl.handle.net/1902.1/21447.Search in Google Scholar
Bartels, L. M. 1991. “Constituency Opinion and Congressional Policy Making: The Reagan Defense Buildup.” American Political Science Review 85 (2): 457–474.10.2307/1963169Search in Google Scholar
Berinsky, Adam J. 2004. Silent Voices: Public Opinion and Political Participation in America. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Search in Google Scholar
Berinsky, Adam J. 2009. In Time of War: Understanding American Public Opinion from World War II to Iraq. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.10.7208/chicago/9780226043463.001.0001Search in Google Scholar
Berinsky, Adam J., Gregory A. Huber, and Gabriel S. Lenz. 2012. “Evaluating Online Labor Markets for Experimental Research: Amazon.com’s Mechanical Turk.” Political Analysis 20 (3): 351–368.10.1093/pan/mpr057Search in Google Scholar
Bianco, William T., David B. Spence, and John D. Wilkerson. 1996. “The Electoral Connection in the Early Congress: The Case of the Compensation Act of 1816.” American Journal of Political Science 40: 145–171.10.2307/2111698Search in Google Scholar
Blinder, Alan S. 2006. “Offshoring: The Next Industrial Revolution?” Foreign Affairs March/April: 113–128.10.2307/20031915Search in Google Scholar
Blonigen, Bruce A. 2011. “Revisiting the Evidence on Trade Policy Preferences.” Journal of International Economics 85 (1): 129–135.10.1016/j.jinteco.2011.05.010Search in Google Scholar
Bullock, John G. 2011. “Elite Influence on Public Opinion in an Informed Electorate.” American Political Science Review 105 (3): 496–515.10.1017/S0003055411000165Search in Google Scholar
Christensen, D. P., and D. M. Glick. 2013. “Crowdsourcing Panel Studies and Real-Time Experiments in MTurk.” The Political Methodologist 20 (2): 27–32.Search in Google Scholar
Clinton, Joshua D. 2006. “Representation in Congress: Constituents and Roll Calls in the 106th House.” Journal of Politics 68 (2): 397–409.10.1111/j.1468-2508.2006.00415.xSearch in Google Scholar
Druckman, James N., Erik Peterson, and Rune Slothuus. 2013. “How Elite Partisan Polarization Affects Public Opinion Formation.” American Political Science Review 107 (1): 57–79.10.1017/S0003055412000500Search in Google Scholar
Feenstra, Robert, and Gordon Hanson. 2001. “Global Production Sharing and Rising Inequality: A Survey of Trade and Wages.” National Bureau of Economic Research. Working Paper No. 8372. http://irps.ucsd.edu/assets/023/8830.pdf.10.3386/w8372Search in Google Scholar
Fordham, Benjamin O., and Katja B. Kleinberg. 2018. “Don’t Know Much About Foreign Policy: Assessing the Impact of ‘Don’t Know’ and ‘No Opinion’ Responses on Inferences About Foreign Policy Attitudes.” Foreign Policy Analysis 14 (3): 429–448.Search in Google Scholar
Freeman, Richard B. 1995 “Are Your Wages Set in Beijing?” Journal of Economic Perspectives 9 (3): 15–32.10.1257/jep.9.3.15Search in Google Scholar
Goldstein, Kenneth, and Joel Rivlin. 2005. “Political Advertising in 2002.” Combined File [data set]. Final release. Madison, WI: The Wisconsin Advertising Project, Department of Political Science at the University of Wisconsin-Madison.Search in Google Scholar
Goldstein, Kenneth, and Joel Rivlin. 2007. “Presidential Advertising, 2003–2004” Combined File [data set]. Final release. Madison, WI: The University of Wisconsin Advertising Project, Department of Political Science at the University of Wisconsin-Madison.Search in Google Scholar
Goldstein, Kenneth, Michael Franz, and Travis Ridout. 2002. “Political Advertising in 2000.” Combined File [data set]. Final release. Madison, WI: The Department of Political Science at The University of Wisconsin-Madison and the Brennan Center for Justice at New York University.Search in Google Scholar
Goldstein, Kenneth, Sarah Niebler, Jacob Neiheisel, and Matthew Holleque. 2011. “Presidential, Congressional, and Gubernatorial Advertising, 2008” Combined File [data set]. Initial release. Madison, WI: The University of Wisconsin Advertising Project, the Department of Political Science at the University of Wisconsin-Madison.Search in Google Scholar
Guisinger, Alexandra. 2009. “Determining Trade Policy: Do Voters Hold Politicians Accountable?” International Organization 63 (3): 533–557.10.1017/S0020818309090183Search in Google Scholar
Guisinger, Alexandra, and Elizabeth N. Saunders. 2017. “Mapping the Boundaries of Elite Cues: How Elites Shape Mass Opinion Across International Issues.” International Studies Quarterly 61 (2): 425–441.10.1093/isq/sqx022Search in Google Scholar
Herrmann, Richard K., Philip E. Tetlock, and Matthew N. Diascro. 2001. “How Americans Think About Trade: Reconciling Conflicts Among Money, Power, and Principles.” International Studies Quarterly 45(2): 191–218.10.1111/0020-8833.00188Search in Google Scholar
Hiscox, Michael J. 2006. “Through a Glass and Darkly: Attitudes Toward International Trade and the Curious Effects of Issue Framing.” International Organization 60 (3): 755–80.10.1017/S0020818306060255Search in Google Scholar
Kaltenthaler, Karl C., Ronald D. Gelleny, and Stephen J. Ceccoli. 2004. “Explaining Citizen Support for Trade Liberalization.” International Studies Quarterly 48 (4): 829–852.10.1111/j.0020-8833.2004.00327.xSearch in Google Scholar
Levendusky, Matthew S., and Michael C. Horowitz. 2012. “When Backing Down Is the Right Decision: Partisanship, New Information, and Audience Costs.” Journal of Politics 74 (2): 323–338.10.1017/S002238161100154XSearch in Google Scholar
Malhotra, Neil, and Alexander G. Kuo. 2008. “Attributing Blame: The Public’s Response to Hurricane Katrina.” Journal of Politics 70 (1): 120–135.10.1017/S0022381607080097Search in Google Scholar
Matthews, Donald R., and James A. Stimson. 1975. Yeas and Nays: Normal Decision-Making in the U.S. House of Representatives. New York: Wiley.Search in Google Scholar
Mayda, Anna Maria, and Dani Rodrik. 2005. “Why Are Some People (and Countries) More Protectionist than Others?” European Economic Review 49: 1393–1430.10.3386/w8461Search in Google Scholar
Page, Benjamin I., and Robert Y Shapiro. 1992. The Rational Public: Fifty Years of Trends in Americans’ Policy Preferences. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.10.7208/chicago/9780226644806.001.0001Search in Google Scholar
Scheve, Kenneth, and Matthew Slaughter. 2001. “What Determines Individual Trade Policy Preferences?” Journal of International Economics 54: 267–292.10.3386/w6531Search in Google Scholar
Stolper, Wolfgang F., and Paul A. Samuelson. 1941. “Protection and Real Wages.” Review of Economic Studies 9 (1): 58–73.10.2307/2967638Search in Google Scholar
Trager, Robert F., and Lynn Vavreck. 2011. “The Political Costs of Crisis Bargaining: Presidential Rhetoric and the Role of Party.” American Journal of Political Science 55 (3): 526–45.10.1111/j.1540-5907.2011.00521.xSearch in Google Scholar
Volkens, Andrea, Pola Lehmann, Nicolas Merz, Sven Regel, and Annika Werner with Onawa Promise Lacewell and Henrike Schultze. 2014. “The Manifesto Data Collection.” The Manifesto Project (MRG/CMP/MARPOR). Version 2014b. Berlin: Wissenschaftszentrum Berlin für Sozialforschung (WZB). https://manifestoproject.wzb.eu/.Search in Google Scholar
Zaller, John. 1992. The Nature and Origins of Mass Opinion. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511818691Search in Google Scholar
©2020 Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston
Articles in the same Issue
- Frontmatter
- Introduction – January 2020 Volume of Forum
- Articles
- Trump’s Trade Revolution
- Pro-Trade Blocs in the US Congress
- Trump, Trade, and Immigration
- Consumers and the Sources of US Trade Openness
- How Have Members of Congress Reacted to President Trump’s Trade Policy?
- Trade Policy is Back in the News: Will Voters Care?
- The Counties that Counted: Could 2020 Repeat 2016 in the US Electoral College?
- It’s Trump’s Party and I’ll Cry if I Want To
- Book reviews
- Review of The Politics of Institutional Reform: Katrina, Education, and the Second Face of Power
- Review of The Meritocracy Trap: How America’s Foundational Myth Feeds Inequality, Dismantles the Middle Class, and Devours the Elite
Articles in the same Issue
- Frontmatter
- Introduction – January 2020 Volume of Forum
- Articles
- Trump’s Trade Revolution
- Pro-Trade Blocs in the US Congress
- Trump, Trade, and Immigration
- Consumers and the Sources of US Trade Openness
- How Have Members of Congress Reacted to President Trump’s Trade Policy?
- Trade Policy is Back in the News: Will Voters Care?
- The Counties that Counted: Could 2020 Repeat 2016 in the US Electoral College?
- It’s Trump’s Party and I’ll Cry if I Want To
- Book reviews
- Review of The Politics of Institutional Reform: Katrina, Education, and the Second Face of Power
- Review of The Meritocracy Trap: How America’s Foundational Myth Feeds Inequality, Dismantles the Middle Class, and Devours the Elite
