HOUSE MAJORITY LEADER DICK ARMEY is the kind of guy who sports an Adam Smith necktie and worships at the altar of free trade. In his 12 years in Congress, he’s never opposed a trade-liberalization agreement, and he’s always voted to renew most-favored-nation trading status with China. But asked how he intends to vote this year on MFN renewal, the usually decisive Texan says, “It’s a close call.” Armey is increasingly concerned about the hand-over of Hong Kong to China, about humanrights abuses, and about Beijing’s alleged attempts to influence U.S. elections. In a recent conversation, Milton Friedman, who had just returned from Hong Kong, warned him about the Chinese government’s hostility to true free-market principles. Armey now says that “China had better give us some signals before this [MFN] vote comes up in July.”
The majority leader is the highest-profile Republican in Congress reconsidering his support for MFN, but he’s hardly alone. Rep. Bill Paxon, former chairman of the House GOP campaign committee, a close ally of House speaker Newt Gingrich, and a vigorous champion of free trade, says he’s likely to oppose MFN renewal for China. “This is always a difficult vote,” he says, “in large part because of China’s continued humanrights abuses and their more than occasional practice of unfair trade. This year, however, members are particularly concerned by reports of illegal attempts by the Chinese government to influence American elections.” A colleague also mulling defection is House Budget Committee chairman John Kasich, who last year voted to renew but in earlier years had been an MFN opponent. House Republicans already against MFN include Susan Molinari (Paxon’s wife and vicechair of the House GOP Conference), Chris Cox (Policy Committee chairman), Ben Gilman (International Relations Committee chairman), and Gerald Solomon (Rules Committee chairman). Noticeably absent from this list is Gingrich, a long- time advocate of MFN. Just how Gingrich’s trip to China last week will affect his thinking on the issue remains to be seen, but the potential defections on MFN reflect a changed congressional climate. Indeed, for some on the Hill, China is beginning to assume a position resembling that of the Soviet Union: a threat to cherished Western traditions of liberty and democracy. Chinese transgressions bring together a vast array of groups: Religious persecution and forced abortion galvanize the religious Right; worker exploitation and the $ 40-billion U.S. trade deficit with China provoke protectionists and labor; arms proliferation and threats to neighbors alarm geopolitical strategists; and the possibility that Beijing attempted to influence U.S. elections mobilizes just about everyone else. Heightening suspicions is the purchase by companies close to the Chinese government of a disused U.S. naval station in Long Beach, California, and of two former American ports on the Panama Canal.
How many House Republicans will vote against MFN? Roughly one-fourth opposed renewal last year, and that figure could more than double. Big business will wage an expensive campaign to stem defections, doling out hundreds of thousands of dollars in political contributions. But the more the issue becomes a matter of embarrassing the White House, the less money will matter.
Republicans, of course, are only half the battle in the House. But the situation is equally fluid among the Democrats. Minority leader Richard Gephardt and whip David Bonior are both MFN opponents, as are three of the four chief deputy whips. And there’s reason to believe more Democrats may vote against MFN this year than last. They are less beholden to the White House; support from labor makes them less dependent on business contributions; China hasn’t cleaned up its act; and one of the administration’s chief Democratic allies on the issue, Rep. Lee Hamilton, is a lame duck.
In the Senate, Jesse Helms will carry the anti-MFN flag. Tim Hutchinson, a freshman MFN opponent, senses an opening. “A lot of members who previously supported MFN are rethinking that support,” he told me. In the leadership, Connie Mack is an MFN opponent, while most others, including majority leader Trent Lott, remain undecided. Among Senate Democrats, minority leader Tom Daschle is pro-MFN, but opposing him will be Russ Feingold, a member of the Foreign Relations Committee, as well as liberal stalwarts Paul Wellstone and Ted Kennedy. Prior to Vice President Gore’s trip to China, Wellstone wrote him a letter calling it “crucial that the U.S. back up its words with actions in order to maintain credibility with Chinese officials and with other governments.”
Among senior senators, there are rumblings about a three-month suspension, or extension, of MFN. The idea would be to reopen the issue after seeing how Beijing manages the transition in Hong Kong, starting July 1, and what investigators uncover about China’s attempts to influence last year’s U.S. election. Among the reasons this proposal may be appealing to China critics, one stands out: It’s unlikely the votes exist to defeat MFN. And even if the votes were there, President Clinton would veto the measure.
One result of the White House’s blind commitment to MFN is that an impressive coalition of conservative activists and groups has mobilized to press for revocation. National Empowerment Television, the network led by conservative guru Paul Weyrich, will soon launch an anti-MFN campaign, while Pat Buchanan’s columns and television appearances (including a persuasive performance on the March 23 Meet the Press) are increasingly devoted to China.
Leading the way has been the Family Research Council. The Washington-based group, led by Gary Bauer, is testing anti-MFN radio ads in California and has told its state affiliates to use the MFN vote when scoring members of Congress on pro-family issues. Bauer is also working with James Dobson’s Colorado-based Focus on the Family. In the next few months they will distribute up to five million pieces of antiMFN mail. All of this activity seems to find a receptive audience in Washington. Bauer recently had breakfast with 25 congressional Republicans to discuss revoking MFN. “Every time I go to Capitol Hill,” he says, “I get stopped by members who tell me they’re rethinking their position on MFN.” And conservatives may be able to link up with major labor unions to bolster the opposition to MFN.
The effort to revoke MFN is likely to fail this year, but it could still serve Republicans well. A determined GOP campaign using the MFN fight to highlight failures in the administration’s China policy, and showcasing the connection between Chinese money and administration policy, could pay huge political dividends. The question is whether Gingrich is prepared to lead this fight. In a recent column, Pat Buchanan exhorted Gingrich to do so, warning that “to lead his party against the White House in a battle of political principle and high policy” is the only way he can remain speaker. Buchanan gets a lot of things wrong. This time, he may be right.
Matthew Rees is a staff writer for THE WEEKLY STANDARD.
