From his written testimony at the House Ways and Means hearing on China's exchange rate policy:
We have a WTO, but what we really need is a world globalization organization.
...
Over the longer term, the currently prevailing half-free trade, half-mercantilist system of globalization must be replaced by the establishment of a one economy-one system regime. To do this the WTO will have to be completely revamped with new standards, rules, and authority. Most Favored Nation and National Treatment standards are no longer sufficient. There must be just one kind of WTO Treatment in all economies. Global rules must be created to break up and regulate cartels. Distribution and marketing channels must be equivalently open in all markets not only de jure but de facto. It must be possible to appeal on such issues not just to national courts but to objective international dispute settlement bodies. Sovereign investment funds and state controlled enterprises must be subject to international scrutiny and to transparency and rules that assure they are operating completely outside the political realm. Likewise, tax holidays, capital grants, and other financial incentives used to bribe global corporations with regard to location of plants, labs, and headquarters must be subject to common WTO and IMF discipline. Nor should the WTO and other international bodies wait for complaints to address these issues. Rather, they should maintain continuous monitoring of real market developments and apply discipline wherever and whenever necessary.
At first glance, I thought he was proposing a major expansion of WTO rules, but I now realize the references to cartels and distribution channels are not all that new, as they are issues that have come up in various contexts before. Similarly, state enterprises and subsidies are already covered; he just wants to expand the rules.
On the other hand, if I'm reading the last two quoted sentences correctly, he seems to be proposing a kind of "world trade prosecutor," who can take action indepently of a complaint by a government. Now that would be a radical transformation of trade rules!
