A leading political economy scholar, Dr. Tucker has testified before legislatures and expert committees around the world. His writing has been featured in Politico, Time Magazine, Democracy Journal, the Financial Times, and the Washington Post, and he has made hundreds of media appearances, including in and on CNN, the New York Times, NPR, and the Wall Street Journal.
Dr. Tucker is author of Judge Knot: Politics and Development in International Investment Law (Anthem Press, 2018). His other academic work has been published in books and journals by Cambridge University Press, Oxford University Press, Brill Press, and Edward Elgar. Prior to his doctoral work, he led research on international issues for Public Citizen and worked as an analyst at the Center for Economic and Policy Research and the Center for Economic Justice. He was the principal investigator on several major grants, including from the Ford Foundation, Open Society Foundations, and Sloan Foundation, which supported his research on The Rise and Fall of Fast Track Trade Authority, a co-authored book exploring over 200 years of history of U.S. executive-congressional relations on trade. Additionally, he has authored over 60 major reports, including The Sustainable Equitable Trade Doctrine for Roosevelt.
A native of Louisville, Kentucky, Dr. Tucker received his B.A. from the George Washington University and his Ph.D. and M.Phil. from the University of Cambridge, where he was a Gates Scholar. He has taught at Johns Hopkins University and the University of New Hampshire. He lives in Washington, D.C. with his wife Heather, where he enjoys hiking, punk rock, and comedy.
Some of the most pressing challenges of our time—inequality and climate change—require bold proposals to set the United States and the world on a new trajectory. In Fixing the Senate: Equitable and Full Representation for the 21st Century, Roosevelt Fellow Todd N. Tucker explores five ways to realign the body with the functions it was
Over the weekend, the Trump administration announced plans to terminate the 1993 North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) to force a skeptical Congress to accept his repackaged 2.0 version. This risky gambit is based on a faulty premise: The executive branch lacks constitutional authority to roll back NAFTA’s implementing legislation. While the president can formally
The Supreme Court is facing a democracy deficit, where the number of justices and the length of their terms have created a Court that does not reflect the views of the American public. This point is underscored by the fact that four out of five members of the conservative majority were nominated by presidents who
Seven Strategies to Rebuild Worker Power for the 21st Century Global Economy: A Comparative and Historical Framework for Policy Action
Is globalization good or bad for workers? One view sees it as an inevitable and desirable process of making economies more efficient: It may displace workers in the short run, but it has the potential to make them richer in the long run. Another view sees globalization as a net negative, leading to a loss
Will the status-quo trade order survive, implode, or be reformed? From the campaign trail to his unrelenting tweets, President Trump has made clear that he thinks trade pacts are rigged against American interests, causing many to wonder about the fate of the liberal world order. Please join Roosevelt fellow and political scientist Todd N. Tucker and TIME Magazine’s Haley
Last week, the Trump administration launched an unprecedented action to enforce the environmental rules in a trade agreement between the United States and Peru. According to the press release: “United States Trade Representative Robert Lighthizer today directed the United States Customs and Border Protection (CBP) to block future timber imports from a Peruvian exporter based on
As negotiators meet in Arlington this week to discuss the future of the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), the Trump administration is again rattling nerves. While no formal proposal is publicly available, the U.S. Trade Representative is reportedly calling for stricter Buy America rules in government procurement, a five-year sunset clause (i.e. the agreement would not be renewed
From a casual look at today’s business headlines, you’d think the Commerce Department had declared war on the world. “The Commerce Department will slap stiff tariff on Bombardier’s new jet” “Bombardier hit with 219% duty on sale of jets to Delta Air Lines” “UK warns Boeing over Bombardier trade row” “Bombardier stock watchers bracing for
Washington State workers got a Labor Day reprieve when the World Trade Organization sided with the U.S. over the state’s aircraft subsidies. But — after years of the U.S. trying to throw its weight around in the Geneva court — the result may be more mixed than it appears at first glance. What They Found Today’s decision reverses a
On Monday, Congressional Democrats unveiled their Better Deal agenda to make “bold changes to our politics and our economy.” As my colleagues at Roosevelt have noted, the platform is strong on tackling anti-trust and monopoly power and on recognizing we are not yet back at true full employment. As the agenda acknowledges, there’s much left
Last year, a World Bank tribunal waded into a long-running debate about how and when states can use a so-called prudential measures defense. While the decision (Rusoro Mining Limited v. Venezuela) was rendered in August 2016, I missed reading it at the time and have not seen any mention of this in the usual wonk
Late on Monday, the Trump administration released their long-awaited objectives for the renegotiation of the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA). If it looks familiar to trade wonks, that’s because it is. In area after area, the Trump administration proposes to change the North American pact to make it more like the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP).
On Independence Day, Two Ways International Law Tests Social Contracts In 1776, America declared economic and political independence from its colonial masters. Two-hundred and forty-one years later, American workers are still looking for economic enfranchisement in a world of global interdependence. Two happenings in recent weeks illustrate how. CAFTA’s First Labor Case: Workers, 0; Capital,
The Trump administration started the clock on renegotiation of the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) in its official notice to Congress on Thursday. Robert Lighthizer, Trump’s newly confirmed trade czar, said in a statement that this made good on Trump’s campaign critiques of the pact. Is this just more bluster, or can we expect
The following remarks were delivered to a congressional panel by Roosevelt Fellow Todd Tucker on May 3, 2017. Good afternoon, Leader Pelosi, Co-Chair DeLauro, Co-Chair Swalwell, and esteemed members of the Committee. Thank you for the chance to share some assessments on trade opportunities and challenges as you look to shape a better future for
The Trump administration’s decision last week to punt on labeling China a currency manipulator disappointed some of his supporters, but should not have surprised anyone paying attention to the policy details. Indeed, it’s a culmination of decades of a hyper-legalistic approach to economic strategy. Before delving into the details, let’s look at the basic economics.
It’s been a big week for President Trump’s trade policy. His various moves have been at turns cynical, interesting, and uncertain. We look at examples of each below. The Cynical: NAFTA On Thursday, leaked documents revealed that the administration’s version of Making NAFTA Great Again would make it more like the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP). NAFTA,
This week, Trump administration officials said they would prepare an executive order reviewing all U.S. trade deals. This would make good on Trump’s campaign pledge to push an overhaul of trade deals ranging from the 1993 North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) to the 2016 Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP), the latter of which Trump pulled the
U.S. foreign policy and the need to cultivate international alliances increasingly conflict with U.S. domestic politics, particularly with regard to trade. The 2016 election featured an outgoing Democratic administration insisting the Trans-Pacific Partnership was the U.S.’s last hope to show its commitment to the Asia-Pacific, a Republican candidate blaming it and other trade deals for
The Brexit vote demonstrated the limits of U.S. pressure. While the U.S. has a long history of intervening in votes in developing countries, recent years have seen a more widespread abandonment of neutrality. In 2014, the U.S. weighed in against the Scottish independence vote. This year, President Obama traveled to England to push Remain, and
I’m pleased to be the newest fellow at the Roosevelt Institute, where my focus will be the ins and outs of global economic governance. I’m especially interested in how international treaties affect domestic law, politics, and economics—and vice versa. The moment demands big new ideas in this space. From investor-state dispute settlement, to the World