Kerry Howley | July 2, 2007
Sen. Chuck Schumer, proponent of such policies as a 27.5 percent tariff on all things Chinese, has an idea:
A leading critic of China in the U.S. Senate called on Sunday for creation of a new American "import czar," saying the current maze of federal oversight has failed to protect consumers against harmful Chinese imports.
A statement issued by Schumer's office said federal agencies including the Food and Drug Administration have proven ineffective at protecting American consumers from dangerous Chinese products including pet food and toothpaste tainted with industrial chemicals.
"There are more than a half dozen federal agencies responsible for monitoring, testing, and blocking dangerous or tainted shipments," the Schumer statement said.
The bureaucracy is plagued by organizational failure, thus we need a new bureaucracy. For evidence in favor of this conclusion, see the shining model of efficiency that is the Department of Homeland Security.
Not that the import czar business is actually about safety (as opposed to currency revaluation and resentment over deficits), but it's worth noting that no one thinks it's possible to "monitor" or "test" every shipment from China. Unless Schumer intends to clone his czar ten billion times and endow this clone army with superpowers of detection, it's hard to see how this plan is going to be particularly effective. The New York Times reports that multinationals are increasing their scrutiny of Chinese manufacturers out of self-interest, which makes me feel rather more safe than the prospect of a federal toothpaste inspection agency supported by senators bent on restricting trade with China.
reason's Ron Bailey pondered poisoned pet food in May.
Help Reason celebrate its next 40 years. Donate Now!
Try Reason's award-winning print edition today! Your first issue is FREE if you are not completely satisfied.
I propose that we stop calling the thing a "trade deficit", which has an unmistakable air of Mercantilism and start calling it what it is: either something like "import/export ratio>1" or "not a big deal you economically illiterate fuckwits in Congress." I suppose, "current account imbalance" also might work, but the current account has both trade and debt in it and as most of the foreign held debt is *gasp* government debt I think the real issue is continued issuance of debt to finance stupid spending not who owns the damn paper.
I might consider this a good idea, if as the first
step, all the existing bureaucracy was dismantled, and all the
employees let go.
But that would never happen, so it's a moot point.
They can use the drug war as an example of how to effectively keep things out of the country that are considered harmful.
The purpose of a "czar" is obvious: that personage may be called to testify before Congressional Committees, thus enabling various politicians to ask pontificatory "questions" in front of the cameras.
I propose that we stop calling the thing a "trade
deficit"
I prefer to call it an "investment surplus". See how the Reuters
article changes...
Before:
There is growing frustration in Congress over a huge U.S. trade deficit with China, which hit a record $233 billion in 2006 and has continued to swell this year.
After:
There is growing frustration in Congress over a huge U.S. investment surplus with China, which hit a record $233 billion in 2006 and has continued to swell this year.
Why does Congress hate America?
I'd be okay with a toothpaste czar if he'd prevent nasty flavored toothpaste from coming on the market. I tried this vanilla flavored kind one time and it tasted like sugarless frosting flavored with fluoride. Yack.
FinFangFoom,
I agree. Toothpaste shouldn't be orange-flavored. Yuck. (Not trying
to be factitious.)
And what the hell has happen to gum flavors? Berrywintermint?
Chocolate? Citrus-Kiwi Blast? How about, I dunno, grape? Big League
Chew is the last grape bubble gum I can find on a regular basis.
I'm anti-smokeless-tobacco nitwits will get it off the market soon
enough.
Signed,
Cranky Old Man
Not that the import czar business is actually about safety
(as opposed to currency revaluation and resentment over deficits),
but it's worth noting that no one thinks it's possible to "monitor"
or "test" every shipment from China. Unless Schumer intends to
clone his czar ten billion times and endow this clone army with
superpowers of detection, it's hard to see how this plan is going
to be particularly effective.
Sorry, but Bush would veto that idea in a heartbeat. Human cloning
- even for politicians - is still wrong in the neocon world.
MikeP,
OK, what euphemism can you come up with for the fact that China
holds a significant portion of our national debt?
crimethink,
Is "stupid government" not good enough?
Seriously, why do you care who holds the paper for the government's
profligate spending? Certainly, certainly!, there is
absolutely nothing good that can come from trying to address this
issue by hindering trade with China.
MikeP,
You're right in saying that hindering trade with China won't help
that situation. I mistook your previous statement for an attempt to
euphemize away the serious problems with our economic relationship
to the Dominion of the Dragon.
And what the hell has happen to gum flavors?
Berrywintermint? Chocolate? Citrus-Kiwi Blast? How about, I dunno,
grape? Big League Chew is the last grape bubble gum I can find on a
regular basis
Bubble Yum has a grape flavor -- in both the traditional and
the SugarFree variety?
Are you asking us to believe that they don't have Bubble Yum in
your neck of the woods??
We have a Drug Czar, a War Czar, and now maybe a Trade
Czar.
I realize this is pedantic, but the last time a republic relied on
Caesars ("czars")to get things done, things ended very badly for
the people there.
I purpose we stop using the word "Czar" and start using "Emperor." Means the same thing, but I thing fewer people would be in favor of a Drug Emperor or a Trade Emperor.
I was wondering if they will create chocolate-flavored toothpaste. It doesn't look like it would go together.
Site comments/questions:
Media Inquiries and Reprint Permissions:
(310) 367-6109
Editorial & Production Offices:
3415 S. Sepulveda Blvd.
Suite 400
Los Angeles, CA 90034
(310) 391-2245