They could file dispute settlement cases and ask the World Trade Organization to determine if the United States were violating the GATT rules. Although the dispute actions would be filed by other governments, on behalf of their own citizens who believe they are being unfairly discriminated against by U.S. trade restrictions, there would actually be many American citizens represented in those actions, with interests directly opposite the official position of the U.S. law, as the precision metalforming companies prove. For every foreign producer who sells goods in the United States there are Americans who make the choice to buy those goods. It is wrong to pretend those Americans have no rights, or no share as citizens in U.S. sovereignty just because Congress has attempted to nationalize it. Opening Up the Democratic Process As a conservative advocate of the free market system, I believe the World Trade Organization will actually open up more issues for democratic debate about economic regulation in the United States, and around the world.
Every country has a wide diversity of economic interests, both as producers and consumers.
The fact that governments have traditionally been protectionist and mercantilist is a sad commentary on the unequal influence in the political process that lobbyists have. Popular sovereignty, as conceived in the Bill of Rights, is actually strengthened by GATT's dispute settlement procedures. The more powerful industrial lobbyists have an advantage in Washington, but the general rules of fair trade are in the broader interest of more Americans, who are not as powerful or don't spend as much on lawyers and politicians to gain influence. I don't think the opponents of GATT really understand what popular sovereignty and the free market are all about. The bottom line is whether you believe in nationalizing our sovereignty and making the power of the federal government stronger.