Plus for Free Trade

The vote in the House of Representatives to reduce textile and apparel imports is evidence of two things, one alarming, the other encouraging.

This legislation is, in itself, alarming, a stark example of protectionism at its most insidious, attractive to those beguiled by simplistic illusions but dangerous to the the nation’s future economic health and disruptive to the world economy in which this nation must compete if it is to remain viable.

There was, however, cause for encouragement in the fact that the vote fell 28 short of the number needed to override a presidential veto. That marked a beginning of a decline in intemperate reactions to the trade problem, suggesting that emotionalism has peaked. And that in turn increased the likelihood of support for calm, correct and constructive responses to the problem.

The indignation that motivated the heavy congressional support for such a reckless piece of legislation is understandable. Americans are losing jobs as imports flood the United States. But authoritative studies, including the analysis of the respected Congressional Budget Office, demonstrate that walls of tariffs and import quotas will not solve those complex problems, although they may serve to postpone some of the requisite adjustments of American industry.

President Reagan has furnished an agenda for appropriate action. True, his agenda would have produced quicker results had he not waited to act until congressional anger threatened extreme and damaging legislation. But he is now committed to a program of providing export incentives for U.S. industries, attacking unfair trading practices on the part of foreign competitors and in foreign markets, and negotiating an updated General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade.

California can take satisfaction from the fact that 26 of its congressional delegation voted against the outrageous bill, although 18 supported the extreme measure. That split will help when the President exercises, as he has promised to do, his veto.