A question about Clinton and NAFTA...

[BlueStorm]

I was having a conversation with my mom the other day about the economy and somehow we got on the topic of Clinton, NAFTA and the open trade with China. How he started the whole outsourcing thing.

I do remember something about all of this back in the late '90s (I was in high school then.) but not too much about it.

My question is: Wasn't it the Republicans that pressured Clinton on these programs? Something like that?

I can't remember.

I would google this but I don't have much time.

Thanks,

Blue

[ulysses]

1. the republicans certainly weren't against it

but it was a keystone of Clinton's economic plan. He didn't sign it under duress.

[BlueStorm]

3. Oh ok...

It's like my mom told me that Clinton was the one that started the outsourcing thing with NAFTA and China but I know that it is the Bush Adminstration that has taken advantage of it.

Blue

[still_one]

6. Your mom is NOT wrong

Clinton wanted NAFTA and got it. The reason we didn't get hit was because of the internet boom, but people in other areas DID HAVE THEIR JOBS OUT-SOURCED, and I can tell you that H1B visa increased in a major way under Clinton

[LostinVA]

21. Clinton didn't start outsourcing

You can say Nike and Levis kinda started it, then Wal-Mart REALLY started it... all of this way before Clinton and NAFTA.

But NAFTA started the snowballing big time.

As much as I liked Bill, DOMA and NAFTA will always be two big black marks against his Presidency and hus legacy.

[still_one]

2. For arguments sake lets say you are right

the repukes pressured him. HE IS THE PRESIDENT

Incidently, he didn't need any pressuring

The problem is NAFTA put our workers at a disadvantage, and it was NOT a fair deal

Clinton was a major proponent of it. The difference is that many things Clinton did were good, this group of clowns in the white house haven't done one thing right

[BlueStorm]

We have prospered under Clinton...

it's just hard to get some of the people that I run into that complain about the economy and of course blame it on Clinton to realize that it's Bush that has ruined everything.

My mother also has said that she heard on the radio that in ten years there will be no middle class. She's really upset about that as she worries about my nieces and nephew's generation.

Will we be able to pick up from all of this?

Blue

[still_one]

11. It is important to remember that Clinton DID NOT START a PRE-EMPTIVE WAR

based on a lie

[jody]

4. You might want to browse wikipedia

NAFTA

[BlueStorm]

10. That's good information, thanks n/t

[Beelzebud]

5. NAFTA and Media De-regulation. The 2 blunders of Bill Clinton...

[still_one]

9. media deregulation was started by Reagan

and NAFTA by Bush Senior, but Clinton could have fought them

[Beelzebud]

14. They both passed on his watch. I don't shill for the dems like neo cons

do for republicans.

NAFTA and media de-regulation were a stupid mistake, that BOTH happened while we still held power..

[still_one]

15. I agree, Clinton helped make them a reality

but he didn't start an illegal war based on a lie

[Beelzebud]

19. No, but thanks to de-regulation, he set the stage for it...

[still_one]

22. That is debatable

For me the choices were very clear why going into Iraq was wrong, and it had less to do with deregulation, and more to do with a neocon ideology based on a lie that Iraq was a threat

Of course if the corporate media was doing their job, and reporting the facts we might have never gone into Iraq, so maybe you do have a point

[bvar22]

7. Bill Clinton and NAFTA.

Bill (Big Dog) Clinton was liberal on some Social issues, and a populist in speech and persona, but he was firmly in the pocket of the Corporate lobbyists and the Corporate (Republican) wing of the Democratic Party (DLC).


http://www.chomsky.info/articles/199401--.htm

http://www-tech.mit.edu/V113/N47/nafta.47w.html

http://blog.oneamericacommittee.com/story/2006/3/13/1852/01949

The Democratic Party is a BIG TENT, but there is NO ROOM for those
who advance the agenda of THE RICH (Corporate Owners) at the EXPENSE of LABOR and the POOR.

[frankenforpres]

33. OR

he might actually believe free trade is good economic policy as paul krugman does

[mdmc]

8. In God We Trust, Incorporated

free trade is good for the dlc, the gop, and the usa.:eyes:

[Jigarotta]

12. before NAFTA was FTA

or something like that, twixt canada and the us.
during the Raegan years, Mulroney (most hated prime minister of canada - MAY YOU ROT! YOU SOB) and pitch in the Iron Lady for the triad of evil.
the acronym was FTA or something. Free Trade Assholionations.

I recall my 'repug' family in laws just glorying in getting 'cheap goods' and how and why that was possible did not phase them at all, the friggen retards, the cheapness, that's all that matters. If it's CHEAP, it's something I want, says a lot. And how bloody great this was for everyone.


they were Two assholes with 6 bathrooms, need I explain more?

[Haole Girl]

13. I did some googling for you-

...As expected, some Democratic lawmakers resumed their attacks against NAFTA during the 1992 election campaigns. House Majority Leader Gephardt (D-MO-3) called for significant changes to the agreement. Two Michigan Democrats--Sen. Don Riegle and Rep. Sander Levin--resurrected efforts to amend the fast track process. Riegle's plan would have allowed floor amendments to the agreement in five areas: labor standards, environmental standards, unemployment and retraining benefits, rules of origin, and dispute resolution. Similarly, Levin's proposal would have permitted the House to consider NAFTA under a modified closed rule with up to four amendments. The resolutions gained a substantial number of cosponsors but never received floor consideration.

President Bush signed the NAFTA agreement on December 17, 1992 at a meeting of the Organization of American States. The accord was signed prior to the expiration of the President's negotiating authority, forcing Congress to either change its procedures or to consider NAFTA under fast track rules--which limits the amount of debate and requires lawmakers to vote up-or-down on the measure without amendments.

103rd Congress: President Clinton reiterated his desire to negotiate side agreements on NAFTA in the areas of safeguards, labor and environmental issues in January. Negotiations with Mexico and Canada began in the spring.

Anti-NAFTA forces--led by organized labor, some environmental activists, former presidential hopeful H. Ross Perot and consumer groups led by Ralph Nader--launched verbal attacks against the trade pact on Capitol Hill early and often in 1993, despite President Clinton's efforts to allay their concerns. In related action, several House members with close ties to organized labor announced the formation of an "Anti-NAFTA Caucus" early in 1993. In July, more than 100 House and 7 Senate Democrats joined House Majority Leader David Bonior (D-MI-10) in urging President Clinton to postpone action on NAFTA until after Congress had completed work on health-care reform--a strategy that most NAFTA supporters believed would kill the trade pact. The White House responded that both NAFTA and health-care reform would be on the agenda in the fall.

Trade officials from the three NAFTA nations announced August 13 they had reached a deal on side agreements. Lawmakers returning home to their districts in August were barraged by anti-NAFTA sentiment. Many supporters of NAFTA returned to Washington publicly undecided on the pact. Convinced that NAFTA's passage was contingent upon a strong push by the White House, dozens of House Republicans--led by Minority Leader Newt Gingrich (R-GA-6)--said they would withhold their support until the President demonstrated his commitment to the issue.

That commitment came September 14, 1993, when President Clinton--accompanied by former Presidents Ford, Carter and Bush--issued a strong statement of support for NAFTA.

More at link:


http://www.nam.org/s_nam/doc1.asp?CID=201740&DID=223558

-----------------------------------
EDIT: COPYRIGHT. PLEASE POST ONLY 4 OR 5
PARAGRAPHS FROM THE COPYRIGHTED NEWS
SOURCE PER DU RULES.

[JohnnyRingo]

16. NAFTA was George HW Buxh's treaty

NAFTA was on Clinton's desk when he arrived at the White House.
He passed it after stripping it down from it's original heartless form. Republicans complained he "took the teeth out of the law".

One have to ask themselves if NAFTA really sounds like a Democrat idea:

NAFTA Is Signed into Law

On December 17, 1992, Canadian Prime Minister Brian Mulroney, Mexican President Carlos Salinas de Gortari, and U. S. President George Bush signed the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), marking the end of a process that began on February 5, 1991, when the three leaders announced they would negotiate the trade accord. Following approval by the legislatures in each of the three countries, NAFTA entered into force January 1, 1994

http://www.mackinac.org/article.aspx?ID=2582

All Clinton did was ammend the law and pass it on to an eager Senate.

...And that's the truth

[AmandaRuth]

17. sorry if this message gets posted twice

computer is acting up - I seem to remember that there was some sort of wink-wink, under the table agreement that if NAFTA passed - the repubs would not fight a move towards single payer health care, which, of ccourse, they did, as if you could ever ever ever trust a republican.

[katty]

18. She's Right-Clinton-now he 'openly' hangs w/HW Bush

[B Calm]

20. NAFTA was a republican program!

[MadHound]

23. No, NAFTA was a corporate program

And sadly it was signed into law by a corporate president. Clinton may have been a social moderate or even liberal(doubtful but hey:shrug:). But when it came to the economy, he was as firmly in the pocket of Corporate America as any 'Pug. Another fine example, which by the way has made it very difficult for us to get the truth out, is the '96 Telecom Act. Talk about a give away to Corporate America:eyes:

[B Calm]

25. It was introduced by republicans!

[MadHound]

28. Doesn't mean that Clinton couldn't have vetoed it

Just because it was proposed by republicans doesn't mean that Clinton couldn't have opposed it. He still had the power of the veto, but instead he decided to what his corporate masters wished for him to do, and signed his name on the line. We've been paying a heavy price for that signature ever since.

[B Calm]

29. Regardless... It's was still introduced by republicans! They get

the credit!

[rman]

24. FTAs, outsourcing, globalization is a neoconservative/neoliberal thing.

Isn't it strange how close the New Right and the New Left are politically? - One party system indeed.
However, this whole neo-political movement is much closer to traditional RW policies than it is to the traditional Left.

[theboss]

26. It passed with a Democratic House, Senate, and Clinton

Everyone here wants to change the timeline. NAFTA passed prior to the Republican takeover on 2004. Clinton got it passed with nearly 100 percent of Republican support and about 50 percent Democratic support.

[Hubert Flottz]

27. Clinton was a uniter!

Even after hours!

[AJH032]

30. What does NAFTA have to do with China?

NAFTA was a trade agreement between Canada, the United States, and Mexico.

[Elwood P Dowd]

31. Clinton also supported MFN status for China.

plus he supported GATT, WTO, FTAA, and GATS. The OP is probably referring to MFN in addition to NAFTA.

[frankenforpres]

32. GORE destroyed ross perot

on larry king live. he made perot look reaaly bad, and GORE was arguing the pro NAFTA side.


edit: what i mean by this, is i felt this debate softened the public's perception of NAFTA

[Elwood P Dowd]

34. Gore also told a big, fat lie

The Smoot/Halley Act did not cause the Great Depression. As for Perot's performance, I was told he wasn't feeling well and not on top of his game.