During a press conference at the conclusion of the Dialogue on the Future of Atlantic Trade today, U.S. Trade Rep. Katherine Tai said this:
Let us talk through and ask ourselves new sets of questions, not how do I beat your regulatory system into submission, or ... fend off your attempts to beat mine into submission, but how can we align and how can we actually harness the energy of our people, of our economies to address these very real challenges that we're facing?
I think this is a good point, and I would very much like to see the sentiment take hold. In my view, there has been too much effort spent by the U.S. government and other governments on attacking non-protectionist domestic regulations that are inefficient, or ineffective, or too burdensome in some way. Regulations usually reflect sensitive domestic policies, and as much as I think many of them harm more than they help, I don't think trade agreements should constrain non-protectionist ones (other than transparency obligations).
At the same time, I should note that it is possible I am interpreting the point a little differently than Tai meant it. She may be thinking about protectionist regulations as well, although I hope that's not the case. For me, when thinking about how much we want to interfere with domestic regulations, drawing the line between protectionist and non-protectionist regulations is the key.
