http://money.cnn.com/2008/06/18/magazines/fortune/easton_obama.fortune/index.htm?postversion=2008061810
Obama: NAFTA not so bad after all
The Democratic nominee, in an interview with Fortune, says he wants free
trade "to work for all people."
By Nina Easton, Washington editor
Last Updated: June 18, 2008: 3:00 PM EDT
WASHINGTON (Fortune) -- The general campaign is on, independent voters
are up for grabs, and Barack Obama is toning down his populist rhetoric
- at least when it comes to free trade.
In an interview with Fortune to be featured in the magazine's upcoming
issue, the presumptive Democratic nominee backed off his harshest
attacks on the free trade agreement and indicated he didn't want to
unilaterally reopen negotiations on NAFTA.
"Sometimes during campaigns the rhetoric gets overheated and amplified,"
he conceded, after I reminded him that he had called NAFTA "devastating"
and "a big mistake," despite nonpartisan studies concluding that the
trade zone has had a mild, positive effect on the U.S. economy.
Does that mean his rhetoric was overheated and amplified? "Politicians
are always guilty of that, and I don't exempt myself," he answered.
Obama says he believes in "opening up a dialogue" with trading partners
Canada and Mexico "and figuring to how we can make this work for all
people."
Obama spokesman Bill Burton said that Obama-as the candidate noted in
Fortune's interview-has not changed his core position on NAFTA, and that
he has always said he would talk to the leaders of Canada and Mexico in
an effort to include enforceable labor and environmental standards in
the pact.
Nevertheless, Obama's tone stands in marked contrast to his primary
campaign's anti-NAFTA fusillades. The pact creating a North American
free-trade zone was President Bill Clinton's signature accomplishment;
but NAFTA is also the bugaboo of union leaders, grassroots activists and
Midwesterners who blame free trade for the factory closings they see in
their hometowns.
The Democratic candidates fought hard to win over those factions of
their party, with Obama generally following Hillary Clinton's lead in
setting a protectionist tone.
In February, as the campaign moved into the Rust Belt, both candidates
vowed to invoke a six-month opt-out clause ("as a hammer," in Obama's
words) to pressure Canada and Mexico to make concessions.
Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper called that threat a mistake, and
other leaders abroad expressed worries about their trade deals. Leading
House Democrats, including Democratic Caucus Chairman Rahm Emanuel,
distanced themselves from the candidates.
Now, however, Obama says he doesn't believe in unilaterally reopening
NAFTA. On the afternoon that I sat down with him to discuss the economy,
Obama said he had just spoken with Harper, who had called to
congratulate him on winning the nomination.
"I'm not a big believer in doing things unilaterally," Obama said. "I'm
a big believer in opening up a dialogue and figuring out how we can make
this work for all people."
Obama has repeatedly described himself as a free-trade proponent who
wants to be a "better bargainer" on behalf of U.S. interests and wants
agreements to include labor and environmental standards.
In May 2007, congressional Democrats and the Bush administration agreed
to a plan to include environmental and international labor standards in
upcoming trade agreements. Still, later that year Obama supported one
agreement (Peru) and opposed three others (Panama, Colombia, South
Korea). Labor leaders - many of whom backed Obama in the primary - were
the chief opponents of those pacts.
Obama jumped into the anti-trade waters with Clinton even though his top
economics adviser, the University of Chicago's Austan Goolsbee, has
written that America's wage gap is primarily the result of a globalized
information economy - not free trade.
On Feb. 8, Goolsbee met with the Canadian consul general in Chicago and
offered assurances that Obama's rhetoric was "more reflective of
political maneuvering than policy," according to a Canadian memo
summarizing the meeting that was obtained by Fortune. "In fact," the
Canadian memo said, Goolsbee "mentioned that going forward the Obama
camp was going to be careful to send the appropriate message without
coming off as too protectionist."
In the Fortune interview, Obama noted that despite his support for
opening markets, "there are costs to free trade" that must be
recognized. He noted that under NAFTA, a more efficient U.S.
agricultural industry displaced Mexican farmers, adding to the problem
of illegal immigration.
We "can't pretend that those costs aren't real," Obama added. Otherwise,
he added, it feeds "the protectionist sentiment and the anti-immigration
sentiment that is out there in both parties."
Obama also reiterated his determination to be a tougher trade bargainer.
"The Chinese love free trade," he said, "but they are tough as nails
when it comes to a bargain, right? They will resist any calls to stop
manipulating their currency. It's no secret they have consistently
encroached on our intellectual property and our copyright laws. ...We
should make sure in our trade negotiations that our interests and our
values are adequately reflected."
Republican nominee John McCain, for his part, is emphasizing his
consistent position as a free-trader. In a press conference in Boston
this week, he attacked Obama as protectionist: "Senator Obama said that
he would unilaterally - unilaterally! - renegotiate the North American
Free Trade Agreement, where 33 percent of our trade exists. And you know
what message that sends? That no agreement is sacred if someone declares
that as president of the United States they would unilaterally
renegotiate it. I stand for free trade, and with all the difficulties
and economic troubles we're in today, there's a real bright spot and
that's our exports. Protectionism does not work."
_______________________________________________
pen-l mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/pen-l
