Who Voted For Smoot-Hawley?

Callahan, Colleen M.; McDonald, Judith A.; O’Brien, Anthony Patrick

doi:10.1017/s0022050700015084

Cited by 8 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 2 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Those who produced export-oriented crops did not need protection, as it could do them more harm than good. In fact, Eichengreen (1989) cites inland agriculture as a coalition against the Smoot-Hawley tariff, and analysis from Callahan et al (1994) shows that even border agricultural interests were more likely to vote against the bill once controlled for party. In addition, evidence from Kaplan (1996) has shown that some farming groups resisted the Smoot-Hawley tariff for another reason -the higher tariffs on manufacturing would impose higher prices on agricultural implements and inputs.…”

Section: The Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

U.S. trade policy and the Pacific Rim, from Fordney–McCumber to the Trade Expansion Act of 1962: a political–economic analysis

Ye¹

2010

Research in Economic History

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

From 1922 to 1962, United States trade policies changed dramatically, marked in the beginning by the heightening of protectionism and then the mobilization toward trade liberalization. The effect of these policies on the Pacific Rim, however, has been little studied. This paper investigates the extent to which U.S. trade policies during this period impacted the Pacific Rim economies differently from the rest of the world. Empirical analysis demonstrates that U.S. trade with the Pacific Rim had consistently higher tariff barriers than U.S. trade with the rest of the world. This paper then analyzes the reasons behind this phenomenon from both a political economy and a historical perspective. On both fronts, the Pacific Rim was at a disadvantage, and its higher barrier to trade with the U.S. was by no means historically accidental. I would like to thank Professor Gavin Wright for his enormous help on this project.

show abstract

Section: The Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%