> Subject: RE: FWD: MAI again. Question for Max. > > well, that's all up to us, isn't it? > > it's true that the senate is traditionally more pro-"free trade" than the > house. on the other hand, as a treaty they will need a supermajority. on the > other hand, the senate is way more pro-"free trade" than the house. > > i would say that if the Admin. succeeds in portraying it as an agreement to > "open up foreign markets to US investment/business" it will sail thru. > > if, on the other hand, the Forces of Progress succeed in portraying it as > "NAFTA on steroids," strengtening corporate rule, undermining minority > preferences, local economic development, sovereignty, etc., it is dead in > the water. > > recently the Mo has been on our side, with chinks in the media blackout > (e.g. front-page Chicago Trib.) Such publicity the MAI probably can not > survive. Time is not on their side. Delay is good. > > -bob naiman > > > > > Business Week, the 15 December issue with the special advertising > > section on outsourcing, noted that Clinton will submit MAI as a treaty, > > thereby circumventing the House. Will it win. > > > > -- > > Michael Perelman > > Economics Department > > California State University > > Chico, CA 95929 > > > > Tel. 916-898-5321 > > E-Mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > > > >
