Haley Barbour, part of the “dream team” of lobbyists brought in to fight for the Export-Import Bank, is also an Airbus lobbyist, and Airbus is perfectly fine with his Ex-Im lobbying. This detail undermines a consistent argument by Ex-Im’s defenders.
Advocates of Ex-Im consistently turn to a cheap rhetorical tool to defend their taxpayer subsidies to foreign buyers of U.S. goods: fake jingoism.
Ex-Im officials subsidy recipients flatly assert that foreign governments want U.S. Ex-Im to go away, even though (1) officials at those foreign agencies publicly implore Congress to reauthorize Ex-Im; (2) Our biggest supposed rivals, the governments of China and Russia, are Ex-Im recipients Nos. 1 and 4, respectively; (3) Our Ex-Im directly subsidizes China’s Ex-Im.
Another favorite jingoistic defense, is to claim that European jetmaker Airbus is sitting at home cheering on the free-market side in the Ex-Im fight. It sounds plausible, because 40 percent of Ex-Im’s financing goes to subsidize Boeing exports. Here’s Ex-Im’s chairman making that argument, as reported by NPR:
But that’s not true, as the evidence shows:
Exhibit A: Airbus publicly declares it is neutral on Ex-Im reauthorization. Here’s what they emailed me:
Of course, maybe they’re lying. Maybe Airbus is trying to kill Ex-Im, and it just doesn’t want its fingerprints on the murder weapon.
But here’s Exhibit B:
Last summer, the manufacturers’ lobby rolled out its “dream team of advocates,” including Haley Barbour, touted as a “master of putting together coalitions.” Barbour is still registered as a lobbyist for the National Association of Manufacturers, explicitly on Ex-Im reauthorization. But before and during this effort, Barbour has been a registered lobbyist for Airbus.
So I asked Barbour if there’s a conflict of interest there. He told me, “I had to ask Airbus” if they were okay with his taking on the Ex-Im reauthorization gig. Airbus gave Barbour the thumbs up, because “Airbus is neutral” on Ex-Im reauthorization.
Why might Airbus be neutral on subsidies to its chief rival? I asked Airbus, but they didn’t answer. So here’s a two-part guess:
1. If the U.S. ends taxpayer-backed export financing to Boeing, it could endanger European taxpayer-backed export financing to Airbus.
You see, Ex-Im subsidies and its the subsidies from its European counterparts are not explicitly prohibited by WTO rules, but they are actionable in some cases. It’s complicated, but in brief: If the U.S. could prove that Airbus won a sale over Boeing because of export financing, the WTO could rule it an illegal subsidy. Of course, the U.S., sitting in a glass house, currently doesn’t want the WTO coming after export subsidies. If we didn’t have Ex-Im, we’d have some real incentive to do so. That would be bad for Airbus.
2. Airbus has its eye on some U.S. Ex-Im subsidies itself.
In the coming weeks, Republican defenders of Ex-Im will try to say you’re either with them or with Airbus. They won’t be telling the truth.
