Robert Rubin gets the floor to himself to talk to new Congress folks.

[madfloridian]

There is heated discussion on this at Kos today, pro and con. I am agin it. I think Rubin is being given carte blanche to present his view of economics, which is much more friendly to the corporate world than to the people and the unions.

In fact the unions asked to be represented to give their point of view, but Pelosi did not agree. I believe the union leaders should get to present their views.

From Greider at The Nation:
Same Old Same Old

So why does Pelosi begin the education of her freshman members with a seminar on Rubinomics? Robert Rubin, the Citigroup executive and former Treasury secretary, will appear solo next week before the party caucus to explain the economy. Pelosi has scheduled another caucus briefing on Iraq, but that includes five expert voices of varying viewpoints. Rubin gets the stage to himself.

When labor officials heard about this, they asked to be included since they have very different ideas about what Democrats need to do in behalf of struggling workers and middle-class families. Pelosi decided against it. This session, her spokesman explains, is only about "fiscal responsibility," not globalization and trade not the deterioration of wages and disappearing jobs. Yet those subjects are sure to come up for discussion. Rubin gets to preach his "free trade" dogma with no one present to rebut his facts and theories.

I remember Rubin told Howard Dean in 2003 to stop criticizing NAFTA, that he could not get him any big donations if he didn't. There were several articles on this, but this one sticks in my mind. I don't much care for the reporter, but a couple of paragraphs show the difference in what Rubin advocates and Dean's ideas.

http://www.slate.com/id/2086258/

But one thing bothers me about Dean, and I raise it with him. He (Dean) wants to renegotiate NAFTA to include labor and environmental standards—his lone departure from Clinton-style Rubinomics. Dean even says: "I actually had this argument with Bob Rubin, who totally disagrees with me, of course. But I think it's because Bob is fighting the last war. He said they use those arguments to try to undo NAFTA. I said, I know they use them to undo NAFTA, but now you've got NAFTA, and you're going to have NAFTA, now think about what this problem is. He said, you're right about the problem. Your analysis is right. I just don't have the solution. I'll get back to you when I do. I haven't heard back yet." (Dean's theory in a nutshell: The structure of wealth in the United States before labor unions resembled that in Third World countries today, so in order to create middle classes in the developing world, we need to bring labor unions to them.) (And I say amen to that concept)

Won't Dean's plan make the price of goods go up? "Yeah," he says quietly. "But so what?" My 25 minutes are up. We've arrived in Osceola, the site of Dean's next talk, and I'm being ushered out of McFun by Dean's staff. But I think Dean realizes he's ended the interview on the wrong note because he quickly adds: "Because in return for making the price of goods go up, you've fixed the illegal immigration problem, you've fixed the drain of jobs problem, you've created a middle class that can buy American exports. There's a lot you get for that.

It's a pretty snide interview, but those points are good. In spite of the heated discussions at Kos today, I think Pelosi could somehow let the unions present their case as well.

Here's an article about how the unions feel about Rubinomics.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/bloomberg/20061122/pl_bloomberg/anm1h6ktw73e

Nov. 22 (Bloomberg) -- Democrats are returning to power on Capitol Hill just as two powerful wings of the party, labor and Wall Street, are colliding over economic issues.

The dispute over trade and budget policies prompted a high- level private meeting earlier this month between AFL-CIO President John Sweeney and former Treasury Secretary Robert Rubin, who is now chairman of the executive committee at New York-based Citigroup Inc.

AFL-CIO leaders, contending Democrats won the midterm elections because of voter concern about job security and stagnant wages, say it's time to set aside the free-trade policies touted by Rubin.

`We need to review the Rubin agenda that's led to millions of lost jobs and declining standard of living for the middle class,'' said United Steelworkers President Leo Girard. ``It's an agenda that has been very good for Citigroup and the financial community because they've been able to finance the relocation of jobs and refinance the trade deficits.''

Nancy Pelosi should give labor its chance to speak next week. It is only fair.

[Selatius]

1. Too bad economists like James Kenneth Galbraith are dead.

He was a believer in social spending as a way to stimulate the economy and help the poor.

[Nite Owl]

2. It is only fair

the corporate wing of the party does not truly represent the people. It just helps the DLCers keep their jobs. We need the unions and the voices of the people to be heard if those in Washington are to truly represent us. That was the message of November 7th, not more of the same.

[madfloridian]

3. Agreed.

:hi:

I was stunned at the anger in a Kos post because people questioned it.

[madfloridian]

4. Sirota is writing about Rubinomics today at Daily Kos.

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2006/12/5/11037/8448

"Unions are especially important in an era where Republicans are waging an open war on workers and union rights. Lockouts are a desperate and disgusting act, especially when unions are offering to stay at the negotiating table and are fighting to raise a state from one of the worst health care metrics in the country. See Taylor Marsh's site for more - this is a big fight not just in Nevada, but in the labor movement as a whole - and it is a battle the progressive movement must stand in solidarity with.

To be sure, there are preachers of "Rubinomics" in Washington and on Wall Street, such as people at the so-called Hamilton Project, who claim to be Democrats yet who have run to reporters attacking the very concept of unionization as something Americans should fear. And the Hamilton Project has attracted support from powerful politicians such as Barack Obama (D-IL). But as this lockout shows - Americans shouldn't fear more unionization, they should fear a country that does not have unions fighting to better our nation."

http://www1.hamiltonproject.org/es/hamilton/hamilton_hp.htm

[madfloridian]

5. Greider has 6 questions for Rubin as he speaks to Congress Dems tomorrow.

http://www.thenation.com/blogs/notion?bid=15

"3. You blame our swollen trade deficits almost entirely on the nation's low savings rate. Given that American families are up to their eyeballs in debt, how can you expect them to increase their savings? If that's the case, shouldn't you just tell people the straight truth? Their standard of living is going to fall. There's no way to avoid it, based on your precriptions. "

"5. Why does the business-financial establishment insist on securing elaborate rules in trade agreements to protect the rights of capital and investors, but claims any rules to insure the rights of labor and workers would be "protectionist" and mess up the system? Don't we need rules for both labor and capital to create a stable, balanced trading system?"

I still think labor union reps should be allowed to counter.

[Hippo_Tron]

6. I'm with Howard Dean on this one

We should trade and use our leverage in trade to force other countries to adopt environemntal and labor standards.