May 21 (Bloomberg) -- Charles Rangel never got the memo.

Such a memo might have said: Now that you are chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee following the Democratic sweep of Congress last year, it's time for partisanship and payback.

Instead, the New York congressman has taken the opposite tack, helping craft legislation such as the Taxpayer Protection Act of 2007, which drew support from 186 out of 201 Republicans in the House of Representatives. He also worked with Republicans to win passage of a $4.84 billion tax-relief package to go along with a minimum-wage increase.

More telling is a deal earlier this month between congressional Democrats, many of them wary of trade accords, and the Bush administration to develop a framework for passing two free-trade agreements (FTAs) with Peru and Panama.

Of course, there are many who deserve credit (or blame, depending on your perspective) for the deal.

On the Republican side, Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson, U.S. Trade Representative Susan Schwab, and House Ways and Means ranking minority member Jim McCrery, of Louisiana, all showed they could get something done with a Democratic House.

On the other side, House Trade Subcommittee Chairman Sander Levin, of Michigan, a leader on developing a new consensus on trade, nailed down guidelines he has been championing for years. Even House Speaker Nancy Pelosi defied critics by showing she is willing to both take on the president and cooperate on legislation when appropriate.

Rejuvenated Rangel

But the trade agreement wouldn't have happened without the bipartisan, can-do spirit that Rangel brought to the House Ways and Means Committee. At the new committee's first hearing on trade in January, jaws almost dropped at the comity between Rangel and McCrery, and the number of references each made to conversations the two had been having on various globalization issues.

Rather than remembering the slights he often endured as ranking minority member, Rangel harked back to predecessor Dan Rostenkowski, who used his chairmanship of the committee to hammer out agreements, instead of hammering opponents.

Rangel has playfully used his age to stress that he was going to be about getting things done. When the issue of a ``strategic pause'' to halt new trade agreements came up at a January hearing, Rangel replied that at age 76, he didn't have time for pauses of any type. Other times he has quipped, ``at my age I don't even buy green bananas.''

Together with Levin, Rangel developed a new trade-policy framework in late March. This framework offered the potential for support from the Democratic leadership for future trade agreements, but demanded in exchange the realization of a long- sought goal: enforceable international standards, regulating things such as rules on child labor, in bilateral accords.

Finding Love

While this new deal -- coming after weeks of public and behind-the-scenes negotiations -- was announced at an amazingly bipartisan news conference, it hasn't found love from all corners. The Washington Post reported that several business groups ``privately fretted about the Bush administration's accommodations -- particularly on labor rights.''

Unions that want a moratorium on all trade agreements until larger reforms are in place were disappointed that the Democratic leadership had set the stage for pushing through two FTAs in less than five months.

And yet, there is reason to see a win-win here. While the American Federation of Labor and Congress of Industrial Organizations expressed wariness, this month's deal also marks a significant victory in light of its years of fighting for enforceable labor standards.

Giving Too Much

The new trade policy demands that bilateral trade agreements now be at least as strong as the Jordan Free Trade Agreement, the accord negotiated by President Bill Clinton and long considered the gold standard among progressives. That pact included enforceable labor standards and was passed unanimously with both business and labor support.

Business groups that feel they gave too much on labor standards should listen to the wiser heads among them who rightly see this as an achievement. With an unpopular Republican president in office and the public increasingly linking globalization with inequality, wage stagnation, and economic insecurity, business groups shouldn't miss the political courage shown by Rangel, Levin and Pelosi and in crafting any trade agreements with the Bush administration.

The true test for trade progress may depend on how well the champions of globalization hear the words of those who opposed these two agreements because they feel that labor standards will do little on their own to address the economic concerns weighing on the minds of millions of Americans.

Get the Memo

On that point they are right. Answering Americans' deeper anxieties and aspirations must also include new bipartisan agreements on universal health care, policies to make job creation more attractive in the U.S., protections against abuses of the right to organize labor here and abroad, anti-poverty measures, and powerful domestic investments in research and energy innovation.

When Charlie Rangel tries to find solutions for those issues -- and not just trade -- leaders in the business community who care about support for globalization would be wise to show they are willing to search for common ground on those policies as well.

That's a memo they can't afford to miss.

(Gene Sperling, author of ``The Pro-Growth Progressive,'' was President Bill Clinton's top economic adviser. He is a senior fellow at the Center for American Progress. The opinions expressed are his own.)

To contact the writer of this column: Gene Sperling in Washington at gsperling@cfr.org.

Last Updated: May 21, 2007 03:20 EDT