As laws are repeatedly passed by members of Congress, people work behind the scenes to try to influence politicians' decisions. These lobbyists present their position to politicians as well as their financial resources in order to obtain the support of members of Congress on their vision of the issue. There is a constant ideological struggle between whether or not the United States should participate in free trade with other countries or whether it should practice protectionism and impose more tariffs on imports to protect its own industries. As in all international politics, there is no clear winner between the two camps as different groups with different priorities put pressure on both sides. In the 20th century, the United States moved from a general trade policy of protectionism to a role as an advocate of global free trade. Ehrlich (2008) Since 1998, 12 free trade agreements have been proposed to Congress, and of these, 12 have been adopted. Allen (2009) The Trans-Pacific Partnership and the North American Free Trade Agreement are two recent agreements that have opened up trade with the United States and many other countries around the world. What made the United States so actively support trade liberalization and free trade agreements with other countries? The strong political support for these agreements stems from significant lobbying by big business in favor of free trade agreements. The increase in unrestricted business options is beneficial for these businesses and allows them to expand domestically as well as globally. Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on “Why Violent Video Games Should Not Be Banned”? Get an Original Essay International trade agreements such as tariffs or free trade agreements between countries are usually initiated by private companies from one of the countries involved. After the initial agreement, negotiators from all parties involved meet to work out the details of the potential trade deal. Allen (2009) The companies and businesses that initiated the negotiations are usually very active in the negotiations, pushing for more favorable trade terms that will benefit their industry. Businesses put pressure on their government as well as all other entities involved in the trade deal so that they can negotiate favorable terms for all parties to the deal. These negotiated terms contribute to the growth and profits of companies, as they are able to export much more freely to countries newly exempt from restrictions and gain the ability to produce more easily outside their home country. Big companies are using their immense wealth to influence politicians in the countries involved to accept the deal. Politicians want to help big business, even if they don't entirely agree with the policy, because they need funds to run for office as well as for personal gain. As a result, many trade agreements have arisen from political pressure from industries in the country concerned. The North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), which took effect on January 1, 1994, was an agreement between the United States, Canada, and Mexico that would end most trade barriers between the 3 countries. Lewis (1993) In the question of free trade, it is sometimes difficult to know where the ideologies of political parties stand because there have been some changes in recent years, for exampleTherefore the politician's political party is a less important factor. One thing that seems to remain constant about free trade agreements and NAFTA is that they enjoy the support of big business and foreign partners. During the NAFTA delegation, the biggest supporters were the Mexican government and businesses as well as major corporations in the United States. It is unclear how much was spent in total by U.S.-based companies due to the poor quality of existing records and lax disclosure policy. It is clear, however, that NAFTA's opponents, including environmental groups, labor unions, and small farmers, were severely underfunded, which likely played a huge role in the deal's passage. Lewis (1993) Environmental groups oppose the bill because many of the most polluting companies in the United States will increase their exports as a result of the bill and therefore inevitably increase the amount of pollution they cause. Labor unions and small farmers oppose the bill because workers and farmers will lose their jobs or be forced to outsource jobs to big companies in response to new trade liberalization. These groups have far less to invest in lobbying efforts against the bill because they have far less to gain financially if it does not pass than the amount large corporations stand to gain from passing the bill. of law. The Trans-Pacific Partnership is a bill that opened up trade between the United States and many countries in the Pacific region, including Japan, Vietnam, New Zealand, and many others. This trade agreement is the largest signed by the United States to date, having been signed on February 4, 2016. The lobbying efforts were very similar to those of the North American Free Trade Agreement in the as big businesses were big supporters of the deal. 487 companies involved in the US Business Coalition for TPP spent more than $550 million on federal lobbying in the year before the deal was passed. Common (2015) The sheer amount spent by U.S. companies alone to lobby for the bill shows the value that big business places on free trade agreements involving the United States. Coalition members spent nearly 5 times as much on federal lobbying as on political campaign finance in 2014. Common (2015) Lobbyists against the deal were the AFL-CIO and Environment America, but even those two titans and their allies were unable to lobby against the deal. a dent in funds raised by those supporting the deal. Common (2016) The level of support for the deal in Congress, which included both Democratic and Republican congressmen, along with the president's approval, allowed for fast-track legislation in which Congress could vote yes or no but do not make any changes to the agreement. . This was a show of good faith in the negotiations, as it let other countries know that agreements they had already reached would not be taken over by the United States. The money spent on lobbying by the US Business Coalition in favor of the TPP could have been a major factor in the deal's success. Lobbying is extremely effective in influencing international trade agreements as well as other forms of legislation. In the United States, international trade agreements such as tariffs or free trade agreements will always have beneficial consequences forcertain groups of people and disadvantageous to others. In free trade agreements such as the Trans-Pacific Partnership and the North American Free Trade Agreement, the main groups trying to influence decisions are big businesses, labor unions, and public interest groups. While unions and public interest groups generally lobby against these agreements because of evidence that they lead to more outsourcing of jobs and less power for working-class families, they have not not have the resources to compete with large companies for funding. Currently, for every dollar spent by unions and public interest groups on lobbying, $34 is spent by big business. Ehrlich (2008) Although many citizens and groups repeatedly opposed these trade agreements, they passed with a majority of support coming from both Democrats and Republicans. This shows the impact of lobbying in the international trade industry and why some people are skeptical that these agreements are passed with the best intentions rather than the personal gain of politicians. Free trade agreements, although they are supposed to bring an overall benefit to the countries concerned. , are not supported by everyone. Workers and unions actively lobby against FTAs ​​because imports are typically associated with unemployment and workers are often displaced due to a change in industry after a free trade agreement is reached. The lobbying efforts of these groups were not completely neglected, however, as the Trade Adjustment Assistance program was created in 1962 to help workers negatively affected by the agreements. Trade adjustment assistance includes programs that help workers harmed by the agreements in a variety of ways, from job search assistance to supplemental wages for workers who received pay cuts due to the introduction of new competition. Lake (2016) Unions and workers may have failed to push to end FTAs ​​because of the monumental funding difference between them and the big corporations that support FTAs, but they were able to places assistance programs to make agreements more effective. bearable. In recent years, much of the lobbying by groups with similar goals has taken place within a coalition of groups. Business coalitions allow the companies involved to pool their resources in order to achieve a common goal, coalitions lobby as a single entity to influence public policy. Since each of these large corporations alone has an extremely large pool of resources, a coalition of these constitutes an extremely important force in American politics. During the North American Free Trade Agreement negotiations, 149 representatives from major organizations were present at the negotiations and supported the agreement, while only one environmental group, opposed to the agreement, was present. Lewis (1993) A MapLight report showed that representatives who voted yes to the Trade Promotion Authority in the TPP deal received an additional $230,000 in campaign contributions from pro-TPP corporations, as opposed to to those who voted no. Lewis (1993) These figures show the considerable influence these companies have when they unite around a common goal, and although it is not officially lobbying, one can see where politicians could be encouraged to vote withone way or another. more oriented towards a policy of international liberalism and free trade, they are far from being free of customs duties. Many industries in the United States rely on high tariffs to survive and continue to lobby for these tariffs in favor of countries not involved in free trade agreements. Many clothing and food industries that manufacture in the United States are pushing for strict tariffs against outside countries so they can continue to make a profit and manufacture at the same rate. Even in some current free trade agreements such as the Trans-Pacific Partnership, these industries have managed to influence clauses in which only a certain portion of foreign products in their specific sector are duty-free. Clark (2009) Lobbying by these companies is an important factor in tariff policy decisions because general endogenous trade policy concludes that governments prefer to operate with lower tariffs to minimize trade losses. This lobbying is the American clothing industry's way of making the government understand the importance of specific tariffs for its survival and American production. These companies are also pushing for selective distribution in these deals due to the growing popularity of online shopping. Luxury fashion brands feared their products would be sold online alongside cheaper, counterfeit versions in other countries, tarnishing their reputation and reducing profits. These companies then launched a vast lobbying campaign in 2009 to convince their representatives to adopt selective distribution. Clark (2009) The movement was a success for businesses who were concerned when in 2010 manufacturers of goods were given much more control over online sales. It is clear that political lobbying aims to promote big deals, but also to enact more modest conditions within or outside the deals. In the case of free trade agreements, U.S. lobbying can have unintended consequences that could either help or harm companies that lobby in the United States. Andrey Stoyanov determined that with the introduction of the free trade agreement, foreign companies and interests gain influence in American politics and lobbying, while companies based in the United States lose some of their influence due to the introduction of new competitors. Stoyanov (2014) This is not to say that it is always bad for American companies, because in the case of these free trade agreements, foreign interests often share the same goals and can add their resources to lobbying efforts. But along with the lobbying power of foreign companies, foreign public interest groups also gain some influence because the two countries party to the agreement are more closely linked to each other and a problem in one country could lead to a problem in the other. As free trade agreements expand to new countries, so does the globalization of working-class lobbying efforts. Stoyanov (2014) In turn, opposition to free trade agreements will increase as new agreements are reached, making it easier for these groups to oppose free trade agreements in the future. This cross-border lobbying makes every dollar spent on lobbying by all competitors worth less, as more competition is introduced into the fight for political influence. Some theorists argue that the most influential factor..