Another reason Karl Rove shouldn't run the country...

[Andonyx]

In a decision largely driven by his political advisers, President Bush set aside his free-trade principles last year and imposed heavy tariffs on imported steel to help out struggling mills in Pennsylvania and West Virginia, two states crucial for his reelection.
Eighteen months later, key administration officials have concluded that Bush's order has turned into a debacle. Some economists say the tariffs may have cost more jobs than they saved, by driving up costs for automakers and other steel users. Politically, the strategy failed to produce union endorsements and appears to have hurt Bush with workers in Michigan and Tennessee -- also states at the heart of his 2004 strategy.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A31768-2003Sep18.html

[corplinx]

I think the "new tone" just showed the problem. You can't be a free trader and a protectionist at the same time and achieve much. In some areas there isn't room for compromise.

[jj]

He's between a rock and a hard place here. We need to have basic steel capacity as a part of being able to defend ourselves in the face of trade disruptions, like perchance the embargo that some members of the EEU would like to impose.

But we also have to have the auto industry happy to keep our internal economy going.

Glad I didn't get us into this position.

Now, I could rant about regulation (here's an example of a dreadfully misbegotten one) or about special-interest pandering (ditto) but I quite seriously doubt that anyone in this administration looks far enough ahead to see the consequences of their own actions, so I have to put it down to basic stupidity.