Paul Ibrahim

It was, understandably, a late Friday move by Barack Obama to slap a 35% tariff on Chinese tire imports, and thus, on American consumers who have been relying on these efficiently-made tires. After all, arbitrarily raising such a tariff that harms American consumers, American retailers, and Chinese manufacturers only to aid a small band of Obama union voters is nothing the administration would wish to proclaim too loudly.

Priorities.

But everyone still noticed. Markets worldwide fell the Monday after, knowing full well that nothing could better extend and widen the global recession than special interest-driven anti-trade actions by favor-dispensing politicians. Members of the G20, who had ostensibly come to an agreement that free trade is necessary for a global recovery, had already kept a distrustful eye at Obama’s “Buy American” clause and his continued rejection of free trade agreements with Colombia, South Korea, and Panama.

One could have sworn that Obama was supposed to “repair” the relations purportedly left in pieces by the Bush administration. Oh well.

Shortly after returning the United Steelworkers an approximately 10.5-month old favor and building some additional credit for a much needed health care fight, the White House declared that it did not expect its action to escalate into a trade war. Around the same time, the China Rubber Industry Association announced that it will “propose the government needs to adopt mandatory retaliatory measures against U.S. agricultural and motor vehicles.” Indeed, the Chinese government has apparently accepted this proposition, and has launched dumping and subsidy probes of these U.S. exports. The Financial Times reported that a “full-blown trade row erupted” between the two countries, whose trade relations “deteriorated” after Obama slapped the tariff.

Woops! So much for the White House expectation that no trade war will occur. So much for its promise that it will improve America’s image in the world.

But not for one moment should anyone be under the impression that Obama’s “protectionist” moves rile up the rest of the world in exchange for “protecting” Americans. His destruction of free trade, in fact, “protects” only the unions that cannot stand competition from more efficient foreign manufacturers, thereby hurting American consumers and retailers in the process.

The fact of the matter is that no one trades with China. No one trades with the United States. Countries do not trade. People trade. American people trade with other people in Idaho, in Florida, in Mexico, and in China. Producers wish to sell to any people who would buy. Consumers wish to buy from any people who can supply products at the most agreeable combination of quality and price.

By arbitrarily cutting off an entire group of producers, Obama is forcing American people to choose a less desirable product, at a higher price. He is therefore taking money from American consumers’ pockets, and forcefully transferring it to American unions. This leaves less money in consumers’ pockets to spend on other products they value, in other industries that Americans actually succeed in without government complicity. This is not to mention the business he kills by leaving American retailers who sell foreign products in the dark.

Of course, in this particular case, there are additional side effects that Obama has turned a blind eye to. Investor’s Business Daily has warned that since additional Americans will now delay purchasing tires due to the additional Obama-imposed costs, we should “brace for an upsurge in tire-related crashes on U.S. highways.”

So who is Obama’s “protectionism” really protecting? It is not protecting Chinese manufacturers. It is not protecting the international community. It is not protecting American car accident victims. It is not protecting American tire installers. It is not protecting American retailers. It is most certainly not protecting American consumers. In fact, it is hurting all of the above, some severely.

Obama is only protecting his labor unions. Which, in his upcoming policy fights, and especially now that ACORN is temporarily out of the picture, he most desperately needs to protect himself.

Paul Ibrahim is a syndicated columnist and blogger. He also blogs at www.paulibrahim.com.

5 Responses to “Obama’s tariff on American tire consumers ‘protects’ only his labor unions”