A new bill is making its way through the House of Representatives that contains a "Buy American" provision. The provision is bringing up some debate and disapproval in the international community: Notably, our own international policy guy and Canada. The provision basically says that the government will offer financial aid to automakers who build electric cars, which is good. The provision also requires that those vehicles be "developed and produced in the United States." Which is also good. Unless you are Christopher Wenk, senior director of international policy at the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, who says: "All of us are trying to do everything we can to help the automakers here. But provisions like this smell of Buy America." Good thing we've got such an astute guy monitoring the international policy situation for the chamber of commerce. Wenk explains that the "developed and produced in the United States." The language could violate U.S. obligations under the World Trade Organization, he said, risking possible retaliation from U.S. trading partners. A provision of February's U.S. economic stimulus packages also contains a "Buy American" aspect, requiring that new public works projects use U.S. made iron and steel, leading to some claims of discrimination against Canadian companies for U.S. public works projects. Discrimination? Not really. Economic hardball? Sure. In addition to this recent stimulus bill, two other bills have passed the House this year with "Buy American," one aimed at improving water quality and another at building greener schools. The provision requires reductions in industrial emissions of greenhouse gases. The current provision passed through, the House Energy and Commerce Committee in May and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi is attempting to push the bill through the House this summer. The provision was inserted into the bill by Representative John Dingell of Michigan ;), and his spokesman said it was written in accordance with trade laws and does not require that cars be manufactured by General Motors Corp,, Ford Motor and Chrysler LLC. So this bill is ruffling feathers in the WTO, Canada, and with our own international policy people. But why? The WTO was created while globalization was in full swing and, thus, has rules that support global free trade, keeping everybody on the same playing field. The globalization pendulum is swinging hard and fast back the other way- localization is the answer for climate change and for reviving the economy. Any environmental activist will recommend that you start to make things closer to where you use them as a way to reduce the energy used for shipping. And any economic advisor will tell you that increasing the amount of money circulating in the local economy is good for that economy. Neither of these fits with the globalization-minded WTO (which, of course, the U.S. was instrumental in creating and backing...) The "Buy American" provision could morph into a subsidy, something similar to the agricultural subsidies that keep corn and soy farmers in operation. Both are treated as commodities and I'm sure there would be little opposition to ensuring that the U.S. continues making cars into the 21st century. Or, more creatively, I would love to see the "Buy American" provision reward to the manufacturers shift to the consumer- why not give big tax breaks or refunds to people who buy American-made electric cars. That doesn't violate anything, it pretty much ensures that people will buy American-made cars, and it will accelerate the battle between the companies to make the best electric car. That is localizing and stimulating for both the environment and the economy.