Globalization’s been getting a bad rap. That’s why Donald Trump picked Ohio Sen. J.D. Vance as his running mate. He’s trying to capitalize on the discontent Americans living in the critical rust belt swing states of Michigan, Wisconsin, and Pennsylvania feel over the way their jobs have been sent to Mexico and Asia.

At one time, globalism meant expanding markets, greater exports, and a rise in worldwide living standards. Now, people just associate it with the “giant sucking sound” H. Ross Perot used to talk about during the NAFTA debate.

That analysis is partially true — some U.S. jobs were indeed moved to Mexico — but they also were relocated from states that were controlled by organized labor and the politicians that did their bidding. Jobs moved out of the rust belt, but to places like South Carolina, Kentucky, Georgia, Tennessee and Alabama, not China.

Along with free and fair trade, cross-border global investment adds wealth and value to companies. That’s good for workers and shareholders, not just the corporate execs at the top of the employment pyramid that President Joe Biden likes to suggest are vulture capitalists. The magic of an expanding global economy has been lost on those who prefer near-sighted protectionism that protects what was against displacement by the possibility of what could be.

As former President Donald J. Trump said while accepting the 2024 GOP presidential nomination, “your expectations aren’t big enough.” The proposed $14.9 billion investment in U.S. Steel by a Japanese firm is a perfect example of that idea in practice. It would boost America’s industrial manufacturing base by creating a combined company able to go head-to-head with China’s steel making oligopoly.

People should cheer the idea. Instead, President Joe Biden wants Washington regulators to kill it. He wants the deal stopped, even if he has to do it himself, and is backed by a handful of rustbelt Democrats in the Senate and what remains of the big labor bosses who want to control the industry.

That may not be enough. The Japanese are pushing hard to get his done. They see it would be good for both economies. U.S. Steel’s current owners — which includes just about everyone from the nation’s wealthiest investors to individuals with its shares in their retirement portfolios — have given the deal their enthusiastic endorsement, and why not? It’s helped goose the stock price considerably.

A new report from the non-partisan Committee to Unleash Prosperity echoes the arguments for letting the deal between Nippon Steel and U.S. Steel be consummated. Economist Stephen Moore, a committee co-founder and Trump advisor, called the proposed acquisition “a massive vote of confidence in the American economy.”

“Foreign direct investment should be welcomed, especially from an investor-owned company headquartered in one of America’s greatest allies,” Moore went on to say.

Since, as Moore says, there’s no solid economic argument for blocking the deal, Biden and his allies — whose statements suggest they would prefer that U.S. Steel come under the control of a competing U.S. firm called Cleveland Cliffs — now alleged that national security concerns should keep it from being concluded.

Biden hopes a federal interagency committee called the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States — CFIUS — will say ‘No’ but, if it doesn’t, he still can. In 1988, Congress gave the president the power to terminate any acquisitions of U.S. companies by foreign firms or investors if “credible evidence” could be shown that a national-security threat existed. Congress also said that action is not subject to judicial review.

“Japan is one of our closest allies, hosting more U.S. military personnel and bases than any other country. This deal poses no credible threat to our national defense,” Moore said. “And in the unlikely event of future hostilities, national defense authorities could be invoked then, proving there is no need to use them now.”

The way to reinvigorate the U.S. steel industry, indeed the entire U.S. manufacturing base, is to make it more attractive for domestic and foreign investment. Keeping the top federal corporate tax rate at 21%, rejecting the impulse to slap protectionists tariffs that insulate U.S. companies from having to improve their productivity, and lowering the tax on savings and investment to incentivize the development of transformational products is the way to go.

Phil Kerpen, who co-authored the study with Moore, says “blocking the deal would be a costly mistake that would harm shareholders and strengthen China’s position in the global steel market. This acquisition is a clear economic win for America.”

Peter Roff is former U.S. News and World Report contributing editor and UPI senior political writer now affiliated with several DC-based public policy organizations. He writes for numerous publications and appears regularly on international television talking about U.S. politics. You can reach him at RoffColumns@gmail.com and follow him on Twitter @TheRoffDraft.