CONCLUSION We cannot ignore nor fail to correct the growing power of these giant multinational concerns. They feel no allegiance to any national entity. They support no government on ideological grounds. They have no qualms about investing in democratic or totalitarian, capitalistic or socialistic, civilian or military governments as long as their profit goals can be realized. Let me conclude with a reference to public opinion. Sentiment against multinationals runs so high, that the public-by a margin of almost two to one—currently thinks that the Federal government should discourage, rather than encourage, the international expansion of U.S. companies. Many more simply do not buy the idea that corporate growth abroad has increased employment at home. Seven Americans out of ten are convinced that the main reason U.S. firms go abroad is "to take advantage of cheap foreign labor and that this costs jobs here." Here are the results of a nationwide public opinion survey conducted by the Opinion Research Corporation for businessmen. Forty-two percent of total public opinion is strongly opposed to expansion of U.S. companies abroad. Even a majority of the managers are opposed to expansion (37 percent opposed against only 30 percent in favor of expansion). Perhaps most surprising are the results when broken down by party preference. Even the majority of Republican voters are on my side in this controversy. Republicans strongly oppose expansion 40 percent opposed to 30 percent in favor. The Foreign Trade and Investment Act of 1973 is designed to put our industry on an even footing with foreign competition and make domestic investment just as attractive as investment abroad. By controlling predatory trade practices and regulating the American based transnational firm, the Hartke approach to trade policy will put America back on the path to a world of free and fair trade. Overall, the Public Favors Curtailment of U.S. Companies' "In your opinion, do you think the federal government should encourage the expansion of U.S. "Take no action," "No opinion" omitted. U.S. DIRECT FOREIGN INVESTMENT AND RATES OF RETURN, 1972 AND 1971 1 Book value of all foreign direct investment at end of year (this B1 table does not report "mining 2 1972 data is preliminary; 1971 data differs from that published a year ago in B1 since Department Definitions: Direct foreign investment total (dollar figures) represent year-end book values (i.e., assets less debts or "net assets"). Rate of return (percent figures) represent net earnings (i.e parent share of foreign subsidiary plus branch earnings) divided by book values. Net earnings of foreign subsidiaries equal parent equity in earnings after provision for foreign income taxes, perferred dividends, and interest payments; while net earnings of foreign branches are after foreign income taxes but before depletion charges and U.S. taxes. n.a.-Not available (i.e., either less than $500,000 plus or minus or combined in other accounts). 4 Sum of country figures not equal to area total since some 12 smaller West European countries such as Austria and Portugal (all representing end-1972 book value of $1,318,000,000) are included in total. 5 Direct investment figures for Europe do not include any investments in Eastern European (Comecon) countries. Sum of country figures not equal to area total since some smaller African countries are included in total. Source: Business Internatoinal, Nov. 23 1973. |