Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
Hillary: Cheerleader for Globalization, Free-Trade, and the TPP:
The Next Clintonomicsby David Ignatius
The Washington Post November 25, 2007 Sunday
....But after reading Clinton's economic speeches and talking with her chief economic adviser, Gene Sperling, I don't think anyone need worry that Clinton has become a hostage to the AFL-CIO.
snip
Here's her statement of the globalization credo in a May 31 speech in Silicon Valley:
snip
Here's her statement of the globalization credo in a May 31 speech in Silicon Valley:
"You know it as well as anyone, the benefits that spring from globalization. It has lifted more people out of poverty around the world than probably any other advance in recent history. It has certainly helped expand our prosperity here at home. . . . ."
Candidate Hillary's volte-face on TPP: Sensing the emergence of left wing Democrats, and with an eye on the White House, the once ardent supporter of free trade has switched allegiance to fair trade
by Leon Hadar
The Business Times Singapore June 18, 2015 Thursday
IN A 2012 speech in Australia, then US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton made it clear that she was a big - more like Big - proponent of the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) free trade agreement.
"It sets the gold standard in trade agreements to open free transparent fair trade," she stated then. "The kind of environment that has the rule of law and a level playing field."
Indeed, there was no "if" or "maybe" or "I am not sure" when it came to her position on the TPP…
Secretary Clinton - and before that, Senator Clinton from New York - was one of the boosters of the White House's trade policies and a cheerleader for free trade principles in general.
In a way, First Lady Hillary Clinton already found herself in the middle of the North American Free Trade Agreement (Nafta) during her husband's presidency.
She supported deals with Oman, Chile and Singapore during her tenure in the Senate.
And as Secretary of State, she was a chief advocate as talks commenced over the TPP, one of the largest global trade deals in modern history.
As America's chief diplomat, she reiterated time and again the notion that the proposed free trade deal with 11 other Pacific Rim economies was the best trade accord the United States has ever signed, telling attendees at an Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (Apec) forum conference that she hoped the TPP would "create a new high standard for multilateral free trade".
But then something happened….
What happened was that the Democratic Party, which under the leadership of her husband had embraced centrist pro-free trade policies in the 1990s, has been moving into a left wing and a populist anti-globalization direction in recent years, and especially since the 2008 financial crisis and the ensuing Great Recession.
In fact, the so-called progressive wing of the Democratic Party has been gradually gaining more influence among rank-and-file Democrats. And benefiting from the financial and political support of the powerful labour unions, left-leaning Democrats have been instrumental in the electoral victories of populist politicians such as Massachusetts Senator Elizabeth Warren and New York Mayor Bill de Blasio.
The resurgent populist Democrats have tended to perceive Senator and Secretary Clinton as being too much tied to the centrist policies of her husband, too close to Wall Street investors who have poured funds into her campaigns and into the Clinton Foundation, and too hawkish on foreign policy; after all, as senator she voted in favor of the congressional resolution that provided president George W Bush with the green light to invade Iraq.
As she prepared for her 2016 run for the presidency... two politicians affiliated with the progressive wing of the Democratic Party, Senator Bernie Sanders from New Hampshire and former Maryland governor Martin O'Malley, has each announced their candidacy.
Hence the need to do some political shape-shifting by transforming Mrs. Clinton into a populist candidate.
And that was exactly what she did during a major address in Roosevelt Island in New York City on Saturday, during which she pledged to run against Wall Street and in support of the struggling members of the middle class.
In that context, Candidate Clinton had to adjust her position on trade policies to those that are advocated by left wing Democrats such as senators Warren and Sanders who blame Nafta and other free trade agreements for relocating manufacturing jobs into low-wage economies and hurting American workers. Progressive Democrats support Fair Trade, not Free Trade.
snip
And in fact, at no point during the press conference did she state unequivocally that she was opposed to granting trade promotion authority (TPA) aka "fast track" or that she thought that Congress should not approve the TPP.
Instead, she suggested that when it came to the TPA and the TPP…"I will judge what's in the final agreement," she said.
snip
And let's not forget how those promises to workers and to Americans work out:
"It sets the gold standard in trade agreements to open free transparent fair trade," she stated then. "The kind of environment that has the rule of law and a level playing field."
Indeed, there was no "if" or "maybe" or "I am not sure" when it came to her position on the TPP…
Secretary Clinton - and before that, Senator Clinton from New York - was one of the boosters of the White House's trade policies and a cheerleader for free trade principles in general.
In a way, First Lady Hillary Clinton already found herself in the middle of the North American Free Trade Agreement (Nafta) during her husband's presidency.
She supported deals with Oman, Chile and Singapore during her tenure in the Senate.
And as Secretary of State, she was a chief advocate as talks commenced over the TPP, one of the largest global trade deals in modern history.
As America's chief diplomat, she reiterated time and again the notion that the proposed free trade deal with 11 other Pacific Rim economies was the best trade accord the United States has ever signed, telling attendees at an Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (Apec) forum conference that she hoped the TPP would "create a new high standard for multilateral free trade".
But then something happened….
What happened was that the Democratic Party, which under the leadership of her husband had embraced centrist pro-free trade policies in the 1990s, has been moving into a left wing and a populist anti-globalization direction in recent years, and especially since the 2008 financial crisis and the ensuing Great Recession.
In fact, the so-called progressive wing of the Democratic Party has been gradually gaining more influence among rank-and-file Democrats. And benefiting from the financial and political support of the powerful labour unions, left-leaning Democrats have been instrumental in the electoral victories of populist politicians such as Massachusetts Senator Elizabeth Warren and New York Mayor Bill de Blasio.
The resurgent populist Democrats have tended to perceive Senator and Secretary Clinton as being too much tied to the centrist policies of her husband, too close to Wall Street investors who have poured funds into her campaigns and into the Clinton Foundation, and too hawkish on foreign policy; after all, as senator she voted in favor of the congressional resolution that provided president George W Bush with the green light to invade Iraq.
As she prepared for her 2016 run for the presidency... two politicians affiliated with the progressive wing of the Democratic Party, Senator Bernie Sanders from New Hampshire and former Maryland governor Martin O'Malley, has each announced their candidacy.
Hence the need to do some political shape-shifting by transforming Mrs. Clinton into a populist candidate.
And that was exactly what she did during a major address in Roosevelt Island in New York City on Saturday, during which she pledged to run against Wall Street and in support of the struggling members of the middle class.
In that context, Candidate Clinton had to adjust her position on trade policies to those that are advocated by left wing Democrats such as senators Warren and Sanders who blame Nafta and other free trade agreements for relocating manufacturing jobs into low-wage economies and hurting American workers. Progressive Democrats support Fair Trade, not Free Trade.
snip
And in fact, at no point during the press conference did she state unequivocally that she was opposed to granting trade promotion authority (TPA) aka "fast track" or that she thought that Congress should not approve the TPP.
Instead, she suggested that when it came to the TPA and the TPP…"I will judge what's in the final agreement," she said.
snip
And let's not forget how those promises to workers and to Americans work out:
Clinton has in the past recognized free trade deals’ impact on U.S. manufacturing jobs. In 2007, she declared her opposition to a proposed free trade agreement with South Korea, citing concerns about the deal’s effects on the domestic manufacturing sector.
"It will hurt the U.S. auto industry, increase our trade deficit, cost us good middle-class jobs and make America less competitive,” she told the AFL-CIO.
Only a few years later, however, she pressed for the deal’s passage, personally pushing Democratic senators to back it.
Since the deal was ratified, the United States’ trade deficit with South Korea has grown.
According to EPI, that has cost an additional 75,000 U.S. jobs, mostly in manufacturing.
http://www.ibtimes.com/political-capital/despite-walmart-ties-support-free-trade-hillary-clinton-touts-commitment-2323480
"It will hurt the U.S. auto industry, increase our trade deficit, cost us good middle-class jobs and make America less competitive,” she told the AFL-CIO.
Only a few years later, however, she pressed for the deal’s passage, personally pushing Democratic senators to back it.
Since the deal was ratified, the United States’ trade deficit with South Korea has grown.
According to EPI, that has cost an additional 75,000 U.S. jobs, mostly in manufacturing.
http://www.ibtimes.com/political-capital/despite-walmart-ties-support-free-trade-hillary-clinton-touts-commitment-2323480
4 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
= new reply since forum marked as read
