Galindez writes: "Hillary Clinton's refusal to take a position on the Trans-Pacific Partnership is tantamount to a betrayal of American workers and the Democratic Party she is attempting to lead.
Hillary Clinton. (photo: Marc Nozell/Flickr)
Hillary Clinton's Betrayal of American Workers
22 June 15
illary Clinton’s refusal to take a position on the Trans-Pacific Partnership is tantamount to a betrayal of American workers and the Democratic Party she is attempting to lead. Leaders stand and fight with the people they lead. Hillary Clinton’s failure to get off the fence and side with most of the Democrats in Congress and all of the labor unions is helping to keep the disastrous trade deal alive. In her first public rally of the campaign, in Iowa, Clinton spoke on the issue. She called on President Obama to work with Nancy Pelosi on addressing the concerns of Congressional Democrats. She also called on him to use the delay in Congress to go back to the table and improve the controversial trade deal.
That all sounds nice. The problem is she is trying to have it both ways.
She has refused to take any position on Fast Track or Trade Adjustment Assistance, and her only position on the TPP itself is that it needs to meet certain standards. These are standards that at one time she felt the deal met, but now she is trying to straddle the fence and hope the issue goes away. The standards, according to Clinton, are 1) does it grow jobs, grow wages and protect American workers, and 2) does it protect our national security? This has been her position throughout the campaign, but it differs from her position when she was Secretary of State, when she called the TPP the “gold standard” of trade deals.
A story on CNN showed 45 times when Secretary Clinton made statements supporting the trade deal. Among them were the following.
On November 17, 2012, in remarks on “Delivering on the Promise of Economic Statecraft,” Clinton said:
“And with Singapore and a growing list of other countries on both sides of the Pacific, we are making progress toward finalizing a far-reaching new trade agreement called the Trans-Pacific Partnership. The so-called TPP will lower barriers, raise standards, and drive long-term growth across the region. It will cover 40 percent of the world’s total trade and establish strong protections for workers and the environment. Better jobs with higher wages and safer working conditions, including for women, migrant workers and others too often in the past excluded from the formal economy will help build Asia’s middle class and rebalance the global economy. Canada and Mexico have already joined the original TPP partners. We continue to consult with Japan. And we are offering to assist with capacity building, so that every country in ASEAN can eventually join. We welcome the interest of any nation willing to meet 21st century standards as embodied in the TPP, including China.”
On November 15, 2012, during remarks at Techport Australia, she said:
“... we need to keep upping our game both bilaterally and with partners across the region through agreements like the Trans-Pacific Partnership or TPP. Australia is a critical partner. This TPP sets the gold standard in trade agreements to open free, transparent, fair trade, the kind of environment that has the rule of law and a level playing field. And when negotiated, this agreement will cover 40 percent of the world’s total trade and build in strong protections for workers and the environment.”
On November 18, 2011, during remarks at the ASEAN Business and Investment Summit, the secretary said:
“Now let me describe briefly four ways that we want to work with you: first, by lowering trade barriers; second, by strengthening the investment climate; third, by pursuing commercial diplomacy; and fourth, by supporting entrepreneurs. We’re excited about the innovative trade agreement called the Trans-Pacific Partnership, or TPP. That would bring economies from across the Pacific, developed and developing alike, into a single trading community, not only to create more growth, but better growth.”
So there you have – it she was for the TPP before she wasn’t. Well if she isn’t still in support, she won’t say. This is not the first time her position on a trade deal has changed when running for president. She was for NAFTA before she became a candidate for president in 2007 and 2008. Ironically it was President Obama who said: “The fact is, she was saying great things about NAFTA until she started running for president,” during the 2008 fight for the Democratic Party nomination.
Fast Track
The biggest dodge is on Fast Track, where the former senator from New York refuses to take a position. A senior advisor speaking on background to several reporters said that Hillary Clinton’s position on Fast Track is that it is a procedural issue, and that it is up to Congress to decide how it wants to consider trade deals. Is Clinton saying that only elected officials should have a say in trade policy? Does that mean she won’t ever take a position on whether the delegate from the District of Columbia should have a vote in Congress? Does that mean she won’t take a position on the nuclear option? The leader of the Democratic Party can’t take positions on procedural issues in Congress.
The current Fast Track legislation, if passed, would be in effect for six years, and would cover all trade deals, so it is more than just a procedural issue. There is not a union in the country that doesn’t oppose Fast Track. If Hillary Clinton wanted to support workers, she would oppose Fast Track and stop passing the buck. Is this what we can expect from a President Clinton? Will she choose her supporters on Wall Street ahead of American workers?
They haven’t negotiated it yet? They have been negotiating for years. She called it the “gold standard” years ago. As Senator Elizabeth Warren has been saying, while the public is being kept in the dark on the negotiations, Wall Street has not: they have been able to see the drafts and weigh in on the deal. Labor has been able to see and weigh in on draft proposals by US negotiators, but they have not seen the text of what has been agreed upon and can’t discuss what they have seen.
Members of Congress can go into a locked room and view the text but can’t take notes or discuss what they have seen. Why the secrecy? The countries they are negotiating with know what has been agreed to. It’s only the scrutiny from the public that they are trying to avoid. If there is nothing to hide, release the text. If it is the “gold standard” of trade deals, then support it, Secretary Clinton. If it is not, then stand with American workers and oppose it. Leaders don’t sit on the fence. If you want to lead the Democratic Party, then stand with Democrats and workers and not your donors on Wall Street.
Scott Galindez attended Syracuse University, where he first became politically active. The writings of El Salvador's slain archbishop Oscar Romero and the on-campus South Africa divestment movement converted him from a Reagan supporter to an activist for Peace and Justice. Over the years he has been influenced by the likes of Philip Berrigan, William Thomas, Mitch Snyder, Don White, Lisa Fithian, and Paul Wellstone. Scott met Marc Ash while organizing counterinaugural events after George W. Bush's first stolen election. Scott will be spending a year covering the presidential election from Iowa.
Reader Supported News is the Publication of Origin for this work. Permission to republish is freely granted with credit and a link back to Reader Supported News.
|
THE NEW STREAMLINED RSN LOGIN PROCESS: Register once, then login and you are ready to comment. All you need is a Username and a Password of your choosing and you are free to comment whenever you like! Welcome to the Reader Supported News community. |
