Tide Is Shifting On U.S. Exports

Two decades later, sales to foreign firms account for close to a third of Richards' revenue -- more than double what it was 10 years ago. The firm projects that exports will account for half of its business in another five years, a shift that is turning heads among the firm's 125 employees.

"It wasn't that long ago that guys looked at globalization like it is going to cause us all to lose our jobs," said Wells Rankin, a supervisor who began as a drill press operator at Richards in 1989. "Now it's probably going to save our jobs."

Nationally, exports grew 12.7 percent between 2005 and 2006. This year, they are on track to increase even more, allowing the economy to continue growing at a healthy clip despite the steep downturn in the housing industry.

Whether this boom is a temporary phenomenon tied to the declining dollar or a harbinger of a fundamental shift propelled by the rapid rise in living standards in developing nations is the subject of intense debate.

"For us, the fact that countries such as China and India are building so much infrastructure is why they are a growth market," said Jason Cooper, a Richards vice president, voicing a view shared by the Bush administration and many Republicans.

The breakneck development transforming such places as China and India mean more business opportunities for Richards. The firm's sophisticated valves, outfitted with special controls at the company's plant, are critical to processes at places including refineries and petrochemical plants, which turn out products from fuel to the plastic used to wrap shirts.

"Businesses are getting behind exports, and we are becoming a major, major exporter," said Commerce Secretary Carlos M. Gutierrez. "We've got to keep that going."

But on the Democratic side, free-trade agreements and other efforts aimed at liberalizing international trade have come under fire. Earlier this month, Congress approved a relatively small free-trade agreement with Peru, but larger deals with Panama, Colombia and South Korea are in doubt because of concerns that they would cost U.S. jobs.

Sen. Sherrod Brown (D-Ohio), who made trade deals a signature issue in his campaign last year to unseat Mike DeWine (R), has called for a pause in the agreements while the United States develops a new model that pays greater attention to worker conditions abroad and their impact on jobs at home. "We want trade and more of it," Brown said. "But we want trade that grows our economy, rather than undercutting it."

Leading Democratic presidential candidates have been cool toward free-trade agreements, with suggestions that range from a "timeout" on new deals (Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton) to a renegotiation of the 1994 North American Free Trade Agreement (Sen. Barack Obama), and a bid for NAFTA to be "reworked" with stronger environmental and labor standards (John Edwards).

Much of the public also sees free-trade agreements as bad for the country. Forty-six percent of people polled in March by NBC News and the Wall Street Journal said the United States is being harmed by them, while 28 percent said the nation is benefiting. Only 31 percent said they were being personally hurt by the global economy.

Ohio, home of Richards Industries and Tedia, is at the center of this swirling debate. The state's unemployment rate of 5.9 percent is 25 percent above the national average. More than 200,000 manufacturing jobs have disappeared in the state since 2000, and one in three registered voters rate economic conditions as "poor," according to the latest Ohio Poll.