Agency Consolidation Proposal Prompts Caution Among Trade Lawyers

Trade lawyers reacted with caution to President Obama's proposal Friday to consolidate six federal agencies that focus on business and trade.

Combining the U.S. Department of Commerce's core business and trade functions, the Small Business Administration, the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative, the Export-Import Bank, the Overseas Private Investment Corporation, and the U.S. Trade and Development Agency would “streamline government to make it work better for the American people while eliminating duplication, waste and inefficiencies,” according to today’s White House announcement.

Trade lawyers are not so sure.

“A lot of work goes into these reorganizations, and unless there is an obvious benefit to doing them, they may not be worth the effort,” said Paul Rosenthal, an international trade and government relations partner at Kelley Drye & Warren in Washington.

“I don't know any details about the proposal, and as we know, the devil is in the details," he continued. "But, at the outset, I don't see any major benefit to this proposal, at least when it comes to the trade remedy/enforcement functions of the government. So, I am skeptical, but withholding judgment.”

The White House claims that “Consolidating these agencies along with other related programs will help entrepreneurs and businesses of all sizes grow, compete, and hire, leveraging one cohesive department with one mission: to spur job creation and expand the U.S. economy.”

Obama called on Congress to reinstate presidential authority to reorganize and consolidate the federal government — power that was last granted to President Ronald Reagan. This time, though, the White House promised that any plan would be required to reduce the number of government agencies or save taxpayer dollars.

Greenberg Traurig global practice group co-chair James Bacchus, a former World Trade Organization chief judge, saw some potential benefits to the plan.

“The United States is among the few countries in the world without a true trade ministry as a major government department,” he said. “Reorganization offers an opportunity to elevate trade while saving money. However, reorganization must maintain the traditional emphasis of the [U.S. Trade Representative] on creating more market access by negotiating lower barriers to trade, and not make a new single trade agency subservient to domestic protectionist interests.”

Comments

[SMKu]

Comments/
US Trade Act/
finance/commerce/
corporate laws.

Hail Him!

[Joe Jefferis]

Will Cordray rule over all commerce instead?

[DF Lickiss]

If he had done this in 2009 rather than wasting time w/ the health care act his actions might be viewed with less skepticism. As it is being done on just as the elections are gathering news attention it seems more of a bit to secure re-election than real concern about the role of government in our economy.

[HSG]

The GOP accuses Obama of bloating the government, then when he attempts to shrink government, they criticize him again for some alleged usurpation. Soon they'll be blaming him for the War of 1812.

[Laurence Gillis]

I wouldn't trust a Republican president with that kind of authority. Why would I even THINK about allowing a Democrat to do so?

Besides, the Constitutional authority to create (and to un-create) these agencies resides in Congress, not the Executive. Admittedly, with the entrenched bureaucracies involved here, the Gordian Knot is not likely to get unravelled. On balance, so be it.

[Grigsby Law Group]

How much of a shock it is that Obama is still attempting to seize more power for a role that has not congressional over sight once the power has been given? Not much of a shock.