Their position had been based partially on economic interests but also on ideological orientation and by the time the early 1960s rolled around, concerns about increased imports created concerns about labors defection from the pro-trade arena (1999). The Kennedy administration would manage to maintain labors support through an extension of a program of trade adjustment assistance (TAA) (1999). It offered special benefits to workers who lose their jobs to import competition and in the spirit of reciprocal non-interference, other participants who are in the trade debate do not object to the concession (1999). A third period in the development of the trade debates began in the early 1990s (1999). It is further marked by the expansion in the scope of civil society and its newest entrants in the debate are environmentalists as well as consumer groups, many of whom have made common cause with labor unions in opposing further trade liberalization (1999). The decision for the U.S. to embrace free trade began before the 1934 RTAA, but admittedly that was an important point in history. There are different opinions on the subject of course and as noted, the debates include consumers who are concerned not only about the environment but workers in other nations who may be toiling for long hours in order to deliver goods to western nations. The trade debate encompasses those issues, but broader issues of course go to economics. Presidential Candidate, Ross Perot for instances made a funny face when asked about NAFTA in a debate sometime ago. Clearly, people like Ross Perot and Pat Buchanan do not see opening up borders as good. They only see that Americans in low paying jobs would be competing with workers from other nations who are making very low wages. Other economic theories however actually promote the idea of free trade. In 1776, the famous economist Adam Smith first published his Wealth of Nations.