IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/cup/intorg/v68y2014i02p263-295_00.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

America and Trade Liberalization: The Limits of Institutional Reform

Author

Listed:
  • Goldstein, Judith
  • Gulotty, Robert

Abstract

Among scholars, delegation of power to the US president in 1934 is widely believed to have been a necessary requisite for tariff reductions in ensuing years. According to conventional wisdom, delegation to the president sheltered Congress from constituent pressure thereby facilitating the opening of the US economy and the emergence of the United States as a world power. This article suggests a revision to our understanding of just how that occurred. Through a close study of the US tariff schedule between 1928 and 1964, focusing on highly protected products, we examine which products were subject to liberalization and at what time. After 1934, delegation led to a change in trade policy, not because Congress gave up their constitutional prerogative in this domain but because presidents were able to target the potential economic dislocation that derives from import competition to avoid the creation of a congressional majority willing to halt the trade agreements program.

Suggested Citation

  • Goldstein, Judith & Gulotty, Robert, 2014. "America and Trade Liberalization: The Limits of Institutional Reform," International Organization, Cambridge University Press, vol. 68(2), pages 263-295, April.
    • Handle: RePEc:cup:intorg:v:68:y:2014:i:02:p:263-295_00
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/S0020818313000490/type/journal_article
    File Function: link to article abstract page
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Emilie M. Hafner-Burton & Layna Mosley & Robert Galantucci, 2019. "Protecting Workers Abroad and Industries at Home: Rights-based Conditionality in Trade Preference Programs," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 63(5), pages 1253-1282, May.
    2. Benjamin O Fordham, 2020. "History and quantitative conflict research: A case for limiting the historical scope of our theoretical arguments," Conflict Management and Peace Science, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 37(1), pages 3-15, January.
    3. Michael‐David Mangini, 2023. "Escape from tariffs: The political economies of protection and classification," Economics and Politics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 35(3), pages 773-805, November.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:cup:intorg:v:68:y:2014:i:02:p:263-295_00. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Kirk Stebbing (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.cambridge.org/ino .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.