AFL-CIO chief: White House trade bill argument is ‘unadulterated horse waste’

[kpete]

"If the president wins this fight, Democrats will be in the minority for a decade or so" on Capitol Hill, Trumka said during a hour-long conversation at The Washington Post's offices. If Obama is seeking to build on his legacy with the TPP, Trumka added, "it will be the wrong legacy."

In sometimes colorful and pugilistic language, Trumka also took direct aim at one of the administration's key arguments on the trade bill. Democrats have called for tough provisions aimed at limiting other nations from manipulating their currency to artificially boost exports to the United States.

White House officials, Trumka said, have said such a provision is a non-starter in part because it could expose the United States to punitive actions if the U.S. Treasury enacts quantitative easing to stimulate the economy.

"That’s just pure, unadulterated horse waste," Trumka said.

More:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/post-politics/wp/2015/05/14/afl-cio-chief-white-house-trade-bill-argument-is-unadulterated-horse-waste/

[Cali_Democrat]

1. "If the president wins this fight, Democrats will be in the minority for a decade or so"

I thought Republicans actually want this free trade deal more than Dems.

So if this free trade deal passes, the American people will be so angry they will vote to support the GOP and make the Dems the minority? How will that stop free trade deals?

I'm not following the logic.

[daredtowork]

2. I think he's saying Democrats will have lost the support of union members

They are already on shaky ground over immigration and H1B issues. The TPP will be the final straw.

But since the GOP is not exactly union-friendly, that will probably be the death knell for unions as well. Unless Trumka thinks union power is enough to build and back a third party.

[bvar22]

6. UNIONS have been one of the most dependable voting blocks...

...the Democratic Party has ever had. IN return, they have been treated poorly by the last two "Centrist" Democratic Administrations, taunted and ridiculed from the White House.
How long would you stay with a wife beater?


You should have seen the way the Obama White House beat down and then taunted and ridiculed Organized LABOR
in the Arkansas Primary, 2010. Adding insult to injury, they then ridiculed Organized LABOR for daring to support a Pro-LABOR candidate.


Obama White House Beats Down Organized Labor in Arkansas Primary:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10024586209

[daleanime]

19. +1

[rhett o rick]

3. If the Democratic Party doesn't take the side of unions and American workers

and instead chooses to support the Republicons and big corporations on this issue, the Party will destroy it's connection to the 99%.

He is suggesting that the Democrats OPPOSE the Republicons on this issue. Imagine that.

[Hoyt]

4. Those are strong words in a country where unions represent only 11.5% of workers.

And a big part of that 11.5% is federal, state, and local government employees.

I'm fine with unions, but Trumka's bullying isn't backed up with a lot.

[bvar22]

7. The destruction of UNIONS is part of the Clinton/Obama legacy.

BTW: You seem very willing to throw away that 11.5 %.
Do you know the percentage Obama or Clinton WON with?
.
.
.
11.5% is NOT something you want to throw away.
I can't see the Democrats winning without it.

[Hoyt]

10. Whata they going to do, vote for Republicans? Besides, a big portion of those 11.5% are government

employees and service workers that even in one's most fearful view won't be impacted by jobs going overseas.

Again, I'm not discounting unions, just the bullying BS.

[nadinbrzezinski]

12. never mind...

[sabrina 1]

65. You weren't paying attention in 2012 obviously. The Unions are not alone.

I see you are celebrating the crushing of Unions, at least temporarily, started by Reagan.

I wouldn't celebrate too hard if I were you.

In 2012 a coalition was formed with Unions, dozens of Liberal Orgs, Civil Groups, Advocacy Groups, (for the elderly, disabled, SS etc) right before the election.

What you just stated 'what are they going to do, vote Republican' THAT attitude from our 'New Democrats' was the reason for this coalition.

They sent a message to the Dem Party, or to those controlling the party right now, that Third Way Investment Banker group, telling them to 'not count on our votes AFTER this election unless we see the Dem Party return to being the Party of the People. Airc, at a gathering of all these groups, mainly the BASE of the Dem Party, they raised over $10 million dollars. Their message was 'this is the last election where we will support a party that is not supporting us'.

Without all these groups' votes, of course Dems simply CANNOT win an election.

The solution for the Dem Party is to remove the parasite known as the Third Way from the party.

THEY are the ones pushing for the TPP. Rank and file Dems, Unions, advocacy groups etc, in fact most of those who elect Dems, are vehemently opposed to it.

You appear to believe that Reagan's policies of crushing Unions are the way to go.

Well, yes, the working class has suffered for decades since Reagan began the crushing of unions, but if you think they do not have the power to affect elections for the Dem Party, you could not be more wrong.

Take a look at the stats for the last two Mid Terms, where the Third Way LOST us the House and Senate.


What are they going to do you ask? The power they have can cost the Dems dearly.

Because as I said, it isn't just the Unions. It is all those organizations who are joining with them, all those voters the Dem Party needs in order to win.

Be careful what you wish for. The working class no longer views the Dem Party as their party.

Voters have been fleeing both parties since 2008 and many are now registered Independents making that vote the largest voting bloc in the country. Dems, iow are losing voters are at an alarming rate, thanks to the Third Way and their pro-corporate, anti-working class policies.

A lot has been going on under the radar. Voters have been focusing on local politics, winning on progressive issues and getting progressive candidates elected.

So, your 'where will they go' routine, is exactly what this coalition warned the Dem party about.

A huge shift is occurring in the political sphere. A new populist movement has been growing while the Dem Party has lost its way.

Ignore it if you wish, but imo, while in the short term it appears the Corporatists are winning, it is the long term those who have been most adversely affected by Third Way policies, are working towards.

And the Unions WILL have somewhere to go, as they warned in 2012.

[jeff47]

9. Yeah, if Democratic turnout dropped by 11%, that would do nothing!

Why, it'd be like the difference between the turnout in 2008 and 2010. And look how that had absolutely no effect on the results!

[Hoyt]

11. Do you think union members are that stupid? I guess bully Trumka is going to convince them to sit

out and let the Republicans win. That wouldn't be smart.

[jeff47]

13. Yes, then Republicans would pass free trade deals.

Better vote for the Democrat so we pass free trade deals instead.

[Hoyt]

14. The free trade deals don't affect near as many, if any, people as some want us to believe.

And a lot of people "affected" find life better.

[jeff47]

15. Yes, people having higher incomes have absolutely no effect on businesses selling more

goods and services. We're all in completely isolated bubbles and slashing our customer's income will have no effect on our bottom line.

[Hoyt]

17. I think lots of people like truck drivers, port workers, auto workers in states where foreign plants

locate, etc., are better off. I think the vast majority of people aren't affected except to be able to purchase cheaper goods, or to benefit from the fact that the corporations they work for here are doing well because of free trade. There are others, not well to do, doing better too. But myopic folks just can't see it.

[jeff47]

23. You mean the much smaller number of people who got those jobs?

See, when a trade deal kills millions of jobs and creates thousands of jobs, that's bad. Because millions is much larger than thousands.

I know, it's a pretty hard concept to grasp when you're desperately seeking to justify an utterly irrational policy that you are deeply wedded to. But I'm sure you could understand if you tried a little.

Oh, who am I kidding. You'll never try.

[Hoyt]

24. Even the wildest estimates of the impact of NAFTA was less than 1 million jobs, and the method of

calculating that is wrong. Nowhere near that was impacted. Most lost jobs were due to technology improvements which coincided with NAFTA.

I have tried, to look at it from they myopic point of view, and I just can't get past the fact that when the world is better off, we are better off. And the truth is, I don't think the TPP or European version is going to hurt us like some think.

[jeff47]

27. Guess what! There's more free trade deals than NAFTA.

Most lost jobs were due to technology improvements which coincided with NAFTA.

Just keep rocking back and forth telling yourself that. Pay no attention to the lack of those "technology improvements" in the factories those other countries.

"Free trade always good....just technology....losing jobs is good.....people starving in other countries means we have to starve in the US...."

I have tried, to look at it from they myopic point of view, and I just can't get past the fact that when the world is better off, we are better off.

Well, when you label basic macroeconomics as "myopic" then you're not gonna see it. After all, you are now claiming we lost 1 million jobs from NAFTA, and that this is a good thing for us.

Because somehow it will trickle down. "Free trade always good...."

[Hoyt]

37. I know, USA first, even if we've taken more than our fair share of the world's wealth and resources.

I've heard a bunch of that.

[Populist_Prole]

67. And yet ( again ) you direct your blame ( and utter contempt ) at the working class in the US

And not the rapacious capitalists who've rode the gravy train and fattened their bottom lines doing what you claim.

And yes. Government office holders in the US should favor the proletariat in the US over their counterparts abroad when negotiating. That's called representation.

[bvar22]

16. You had better give us some links to back up your wild claims.

Woody would be ashamed of you.

[Hoyt]

20. Which claims would you like links for? If you have contradictory info, will be glad to read it.

[nadinbrzezinski]

18. Never mind again

the reality is not wanted.

[Elwood P Dowd]

21. Yep, the dozen or so area people I know who lost their manfacturing jobs

to places like Mexico find life so much better moping floors for the cleaning service at $7.50 an hour or stocking shelves at Dollar General for $8.00 an hour. The ones that are really happy are the ones working for $9.00 an hour at Wal Mart for 30 hours a week with their schedule constantly changing. They've been finally relieved of those $15.00-20.00 an hour manufacturing jobs with health care and retirement benefits.

[Dont call me Shirley]

52. 60,000 factories and 6 million jobs lost

“Free trade” worked – to force unemployment up and wages down. We lost more than 6 million manufacturing jobs and 60,000-plus factories between 2000 (the year before China entered the World Trade Organization) and 2010."

http://ourfuture.org/20141121/nelp-report-falling-wages-in-factory-jobs

You're simply wrong, Hoyt. Millions of people were harmed.

[Hoyt]

53. Those folks take the trade deficit and multiple by 7 to 8000 jobs, assuming it represents stuff that

would have been made here if it weren't made elsewhere. That's bunk.

Further, a lot of factories that closed weren't efficient or were producing stuff no one wanted whether made here or elsewhere. The old hated example of "buggy whips" comes to mind.

Even if you buy that these were jobs that were outsourced overseas, people can find other jobs. I don't know anyone who hasn't had 5, 10 or more jobs, sometimes in very different industries.

Finally, the fact folks "possibly, could have been hurt" by trade before, hardly means it will be true this time, or that they won't be hurt if we abandon TPP.

[Dont call me Shirley]

68. Many factories were literally dismantled and moved overseas, these were not buggy-whip makers.

Those moved were modern auto parts, electronics, clothing, furniture factories and the list goes on.

What other jobs? The, low-paying, service jobs Clinton was always talking about? As more of these service and tech jobs leave the US for low-wage countries, our wages will to take another hit. This has not been fixed in TPP, this is the point of TPP.

Bush 1 always talked about leveling the playing field, economically this is what he was talking about, lowering US wages to low-wage country level.

The massive loss of jobs and factories in the US over the past 15 years has not been some kind of mathematical wizardry, they have been REAL losses. The losses have been the basis of the Decline of the Middle Class!

TPP and it's ugly twin TTIP are bad for working Americans, bad for our national sovereignty and bad for all participating countries. They are nothing more than a global corporate coup d'états, fascism on steroids.

[Autumn]

43. Of course they aren't that stupid, But they might just be that pissed.

You expect them to be afraid of republicans that don't support them and then turn around and vote for democrats who stab them in the fucking back?

[Hoyt]

44. I think there is a strong argument they weren't stabbed in the back.

[Autumn]

50. Then you ought to make that argument. And the question I asked yesterday still stands.

Name the jobs that un/limited-skilled workers can't do that our young people will be trained for?

[Starry Messenger]

22. We do a ton of legwork for elections.

States with unions always have higher Dem turnout. It isn't bullying, it's a statement of fact.

[countryjake]

29. The other 88.5% sit in Right To Work states wondering where their jobs went.

You so easily accuse Trumka of bullying, when it's the Rethug Rightwing Goons of those states who bullied, lied, and legislated......WRESTED proper Union Representation away from their constituents.
Right to Work laws have devastated the power and unity that workers of the Midwest and Southern states once had.

What Trumka has said is backed up by a long bloody history of Corporate, Government, and Rightwing attacks on the ability of working people to organize and fight for their right to earn a decent living.

[Eleanors38]

31. Oh, my. Trumka's a bully.

"Unions are fine." Such an aside.

[bahrbearian]

5. Fake Dem's working with Real Repug's, Give real Dem's a bad name.

[jeff47]

8. Voting isn't a zero-sum game. You don't have to vote for the Republican

in order to not vote for the Democrat. You can simply not vote.

Democrats need turnout, and the TPP is a great way to not get it.

[Cali_Democrat]

32. And not voting at alll instead of voting Dem means what exactly?

Which party would benefit and would it help or hinder the fight against future free trade agreements?

[jeff47]

33. That the Democrat loses.

It's the candidate's responsibility to earn votes. When they fail to do so, that is the candidate's fault.

Which party would benefit and would it help or hinder the fight against future free trade agreements?

Well, so far voting for either party hinders the fight against free trade agreements.

Perhaps if neoliberals lost elections, they wouldn't be so quick to hide behind Republican boogeymen.

Oh wait, they do keep losing elections. Well, that's a clear sign we need to keep going with neoliberal policy.

[Cali_Democrat]

36. There are more opponents of free trade within the Democratic party.

For example, Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren oppose the deal and they are Dems.

I fail to see how weakening the party they're in will help the fight against free trade.

Weakening the Democratic party would empower the Republicans and lead to even more free trade agreements in my opinion.

[jeff47]

72. Yeah, that's why Democrats just voted down TPA....oh wait, they didn't (nt)

[Cali_Democrat]

73. The majority of Dems in the Senate voted against it. nt

[jeff47]

78. And that almost matters.

Because it's utterly useless in actually getting non-right policies to actually pass.

[betterdemsonly]

62. If it is the sellout dems that lose over the course of several elections they will be purged

in favor of prolabor dems.

[sabrina 1]

55. No, I think if this deal passes, there will be a new party. A party of the people, a Labor Party.

Before the last presidential election Unions, Liberal Groups, Advocacy Groups for SS, for the Elderly, Educators, basically most of those who have been the core of the Dem base, formed a coalition and warned the Dem Party that if they didn't stop 'taking our support for granted', they would find themselves without a major part of their base AND the substantial money that these groups have been donating to the Dem Party.

If the Dem party abandons unions, it is all over for that party.

Workers simply cannot continue to support a party that is not supporting them.

And of course if that happens, btw, that coalition airc, raised over ten million at their first gathering, if that happens, there probably won't be a Dem party. Most Dems would probably switch their allegiance to the Party of the People instantly.

I think all these groups, the base of the Dem Party have been preparing for this for a long time.

If the Dems help pass the Fast Tracking of this bill, that will be a massive incentive for unions and all those other groups, to rebuild the Party from the ground up.

Considering how many people have already left both parties, this just might be the final blow.

[Cali_Democrat]

56. A new party? Sweet.

Do they have a website? I would like more info...

[sabrina 1]

58. NO, what we have now is the 'new party'. 'New Democrats', who are they? Wall St Investors. The Dem

Party of today is not the Dem Party it purports to be. So, Unions, and all those other groups who formed the coalition, which would be a majority of Dem voters, will simply rebuild their party and stop catering to Wall St Investors.

The 'new dem' party cannot win elections without them. But they can, so why on earth would they continue to support a bunch of Wall St Investors who have been deregulating, abandoning unions, working to privatize everything, costing jobs, bailing out their criminal buddies on Wall St, leaving the working people to foot the bill?

Let them go start their Third Way Party separate from our party. The very name they chose is indicative of WHO they are. They are a Third Party that infiltrated the People's Party and sooner they go start their own party, the better. Good luck to that, because the only reason their candidates get any votes (and that has changed also, see the last two mid terms) is because the use the label of OUR party to do so.

[betterdemsonly]

59. Thirdway is code for third party! Interesting observation! n/t

[Cali_Democrat]

60. So this new 'party of the people' doesn't have a website? nt

[Maedhros]

25. Tell us again how "progressive" the TPP is, Mr. President.

Unadulterated horse waste, indeed.

[CharlotteVale]

26. K&R

[BeyondGeography]

28. The only unadulterated horse waste in this article is Trumka's

assertion that both parties are equally guilty of not having a strategy to lift wages. The Republicans haven't met a jobs/infrastructure bill or minimum wage hike they didn't want to kill. Maybe just talk directly out of your ass next time, Dick.

[countryjake]

38. What you say should make you wonder why our prez fights so hard...

to steamroll thru this Republican-inspired and fully Republican-supported trade deal.

Mitch McConnell, Orrin Hatch, John Boehner, Kevin McCarthy and the like are all praising President Obama this week.

[BeyondGeography]

39. They were hoping you would say that

[countryjake]

40. Oh, I see. So fast-track and the TPP is a Republican trick to smear Obama with?

[BeyondGeography]

42. They're enjoying your demoralization

Obama gets a F for sticking his neck out without building the necessary support. But that ship has sailed. If you want to ride on the good ship Divide and Conquer, live it up.

[Autumn]

51. Of course it is. Obama was just playing 630 gazillion million dimensional chess.

He'll teach them fucking republicans a thing or two. He's got em right where he want's em he does.

[neverforget]

46. So we can't point out that Obama is getting most of his help from Republicans?

It's utterly obvious why Republicans LOVE this because it helps their corporate masters and for a Republican President.

http://www.cnbc.com/id/102672207

"The Obama years are coming to an end," McConnell said during an interview in his Capitol hideaway office. "So now the action is on the Democratic side. And you are seeing that on trade. You've got the energy of the Elizabeth Warren faction kind of driving the agenda, pulling Hillary Clinton further to the left.

"This is a six-year bill," he added. "So what I've said to my members, if we want the next Republican president, who we hope will be sworn in less than two years from now, to have a chance to do trade agreements with the rest of the world, this bill is about that president as well as this one."

[BeyondGeography]

47. Feel free; but that shouldn't lead you to conclude that the two parties

are equally bankrupt on how to lift wages, which is what Trumka says in the article. If that's what passes for leadership in the labor movement these days, they have much bigger problems than TPP.

[neverforget]

48. "they have much bigger problems than TPP" Yep. with friends like Democrats that sell

them out they sure do. We all know where Republicans stand so why help them?

[BeyondGeography]

49. The treaty isn't worth half the spittle that has been flecked over it

That's paraphrasing what Krugman said about it weeks ago. Meantime, the inevitable, "two parties are the same," narrative has thrived. It's bullshit, and anyone who calls themselves a leader on the left shouldn't go near it.

[treestar]

75. So? Do you always go by who and not what?

Shouldn't we get the best trade positions possible?

Even Republicans want that.

[Romulox]

71. Your post is a perfect example of doublespeak. DEMOCRATS are pushing through TPP. nt

[ruffburr]

30. I have come to the conclusion

That the only chance this country has is to embrace Democratic Socialism , As it stands now we have the Democratic corporatists or Republican corporatists and either way the lower classes ( 50,000 or less per yr ) are being screwed, Time for Real change or just accept corporate slavery.

[ibewlu606]

34. Rec'd

I remember thinking that Trumka was an idiot for early endorsing Obama in 2011 considering he had done nothing for labor in his first term except for signing Lily Ledbetter.

[Robbins]

41. Here is the thing

Unions need to stop supporting dems who don't deserve support.

What has supporting CLinton and Obama got them? Unions worked to elect obama and he has screwed them over with TPP.

Free trade bills make it easier to ship jobs overseas.

When Obama attacks liberal dems and pushes TPP like a republican exactly why would unions support dems.

There are dems who fight for working people they just aren't obama or Clinton.

Unions need to get behind Bernie Sanders who has record for being for working people and not Corporations.

The white house can use the foreign boogyman all they want but only winners of TPP are corporations,wall street and banks and their
puppets in both partys which includes Obama.

[840high]

54. Yep. Thank you.

[Elwood P Dowd]

63. That about sums it up. (nt)

[liberal_at_heart]

66. +1

[99Forever]

57. I just call it plain old HORSESHIT.

The President has no clothes.

[marym625]

61. K&R!

I

[MFrohike]

64. They said that?

Wow, that's the most cynical thing I've seen this administration say yet. They really must think the entire population is stupid. Yes, a currency manipulation provision would get in the way of another round of QE. That's not a bad thing at all. QE has inflated the living hell out of asset prices, but has done absolutely nothing to stimulate the real economy. It's paper profits and reflating the bubble, nothing else.

Damn, that's just some dishonest shit.

[woo me with science]

69. K&R

[colsohlibgal]

70. Brave Soldiers To The End

I've picked out 3 who are working overtime shilling for this bill, not hard to pick them out. They get credit for doggedness.

You always wonder. Closet republicans? Blind obedience to Obama? DNC paid help?

His main allies on this are mostly the right, I hope the defenders know this, you're standing with the Kochs.

Now it's WWHD - what will Hillary Do? She's avoided it for now but she can't for much longer.

[treestar]

74. He hasn't really made his case

Labels don't help. How does he prove that the US will be "exposed to" "Punitive actions?" Punitive actions of who/what? Nobody has to trade with us or we with them.

[hifiguy]

76. Trumka is absolutely correct.

[woo me with science]

77. kick!

[Omaha Steve]

79. K&R!