Federal mandates that
government purchases should be “buy American” unless there are exceptional
circumstances,
such as in the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009, have a significant positive impact on U.S. manufacturing employment.
Responses
Responses weighted by each expert's confidence
| Participant | University | Vote | Confidence | Bio/Vote History |
|---|---|---|---|---|
 Daron Acemoglu |
MIT | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
4 years ago I would have disagreed. Recent evidence (Autor Dorn Hanson) suggests yes.Caveat: costs from higher prices & other inefficiencies
-see background information here |
||||
 Alberto Alesina |
Harvard | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
|
||||
 Joseph Altonji |
Yale | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
The policies will boost demand for U.S. manufacturing, at least in short run. But other countries may retaliate.
|
||||
 Alan Auerbach |
Berkeley | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
|
||||
 David Autor |
MIT | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
Hard to believe this does much at all. But I'm speaking based on my prior. I've not seen any rigorous analysis.
|
||||
 Katherine Baicker |
University of Chicago | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
|
||||
 Marianne Bertrand |
Chicago | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
|
||||
 Raj Chetty |
Harvard | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
|
||||
 Judith Chevalier |
Yale | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
This is an empirical statement, tough to evaluate thoroughly.
|
||||
 Janet Currie |
Princeton | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
If the "buy American" clause raises the price of public works, then fewer of them will be undertaken, which will undercut the mandate.
|
||||
 David Cutler |
Harvard | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
|
||||
 Angus Deaton |
Princeton | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
Seems wildly unlikely that the magnitude would be significant, even without retaliatory or GE effects,
|
||||
 Darrell Duffie |
Stanford | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
Seems to hard disagree with the statement as posed. But that does not at all mean that this is a good idea!
|
||||
 Aaron Edlin |
Berkeley | Did Not Answer | Bio/Vote History | |
|
|
||||
 Barry Eichengreen |
Berkeley | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
|
||||
 Ray Fair |
Yale | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
Question is too vague.
|
||||
 Pinelopi Goldberg |
Yale | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
Highly unlikely. Strict enforcement would lead to retaliation and trade wars, hurting US employment. Lax enforcement would have small effect
|
||||
 Claudia Goldin |
Harvard | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
The impact is quite uncertain, depends on elasticities (degree of substitutability, price differences, impact on input prices, etc.).
|
||||
 Austan Goolsbee |
Chicago | Did Not Answer | Bio/Vote History | |
|
|
||||
 Michael Greenstone |
University of Chicago | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
These campaigns may be able to tilt employment so that there is more manufacuting employment, but I suspect that the impact is not great.
|
||||
 Robert Hall |
Stanford | Did Not Answer | Bio/Vote History | |
|
|
||||
 Bengt Holmström |
MIT | Did Not Answer | Bio/Vote History | |
|
|
||||
 Caroline Hoxby |
Stanford | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
While it is possible to write a model in which the intended effect would occur, govt purchases are too small a share to make a model work.
|
||||
 Kenneth Judd |
Stanford | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
It raises costs which increases taxation. No net gain to anyone in the long run.
|
||||
 Anil Kashyap |
Chicago Booth | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
|
||||
 Pete Klenow |
Stanford | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
Less than 0.1% according to one plausible calculation -- even ignoring possible retaliation (not to mention being a WTO violation).
-see background information here |
||||
 Edward Lazear |
Stanford | Did Not Answer | Bio/Vote History | |
|
|
||||
 Jonathan Levin |
Stanford | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
Not aware of much evidence on this, but government purchases are substantial, so expect at least some effects.
|
||||
 William Nordhaus |
Yale | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
Too confusing.
|
||||
 Maurice Obstfeld |
Berkeley | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
I don't think such mandates ever have much impact. In theory they lead the dollar to appreciate, crowding out any positive effect.
|
||||
 Cecilia Rouse |
Princeton | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
Given vagueness in the definition of whether a product is "American" I suspect this provision may be more symbolic than not.
|
||||
 Emmanuel Saez |
Berkeley | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
|
||||
 José Scheinkman |
Columbia University | Did Not Answer | Bio/Vote History | |
|
|
||||
 Richard Schmalensee |
MIT | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
There will surely be some positive effect, but I would be surprised if it were non-trivial.
|
||||
 Hyun Song Shin |
Princeton | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
|
||||
 James Stock |
Harvard | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
The exception in which "buy American" makes a difference is in military production for which the government is the main market.
|
||||
 Nancy Stokey |
University of Chicago | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
|
||||
 Richard Thaler |
Chicago Booth | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
|
||||
 Christopher Udry |
Northwestern | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
Likely increases employment in specific firms, but at relatively high cost. Effect on aggregate employment unclear to me.
|
||||
 Luigi Zingales |
Chicago Booth | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
|
||||
