The Offshoring of Hope: Obama Now Misleads Voters About NAFTA Expansion

[Omaha Steve]

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/david-sirota/the-offshoring-of-hope-o_b_67924.html

Following his announcement yesterday that he will be supporting Wall Street's push to expand NAFTA into Peru, Sen. Barack Obama (D-IL) has embarked on a campaign of misdirection - ironically (or perhaps, predictably) similar to the original campaign of deception that marked the original debate over NAFTA.

Here is just one example of the deception. It would be a conspiracy if the facts debunking his rhetoric wasn't so out in the open and public for all to see.

CLAIM:

"The Peruvian agreement contains the very labor agreements that labor and our allies have been asking for." - Barack Obama, 10/10/07

FACT:

Not a single American labor union has endorsed the Peru trade pact, which extends NAFTA into Peru. While the AFL-CIO has said that some language in the deal is better than old trade pacts, the AFL-CIO is nonetheless against the deal because it extends the overall NAFTA model. The Hill newspaper just a few weeks ago once again confirmed that "The AFL-CIO is not supporting deal." In fact, almost every single labor, human rights, religious, environmental, anti-poverty and consumer advocacy organization has come out against the Peru pact - and that includes those organizations both in the United States and in Peru. For more on that opposition and on how this Peru deal is a 99% mirror of NAFTA, see here, here, here and here. Additionally, please recall that the Chamber of Commerce has already confirmed it has been given confirmation by the Bush administration that the watered down labor language in this NAFTA expansion is unenforceable.

P.S. To the Obama partisans who refuse to acknowledge these basic facts out of a blind sense of Partisan War Syndrome, go ahead -- fill up the comments with your excuses, your misdirections, your justifications and your absurdly dishonest claims that I am working for another candidate, or that I am a "supporter" of another candidate (the horror! the horror!). I'm not picking on Obama -- rest assured I'll have more to say on all candidates as we learn more about where they stand on the NAFTA expansion. Go ahead - waste the bandwith to make yourselves feel better, call me a liar even with all the facts, hyperlinks and data lined up against you. But huff and puff all you want -- these are the facts, and these are the reasons why the rank-and-file Democrats in Congress like Sen. Sherrod Brown and Rep. Phil Hare (from Obama's own state) are working hard to defeat this NAFTA expansion.

[papau]

1. Peru law was great as to labor since 1992 - they just don't enforce the laws, and if you

get to Court the judges bury the cases if they might go against management.

"New Peru labor laws" have indeed been passed - but without a method of enforcement in the treaty by those outside Peru, they mean nothing.

I have not yet looked deeply into the new treaty and what are called its enforcement provisions (I need to get the daughter that was a corporate lawyer to review it), but if Obama is putting his money on the treaty I hope he understands new laws mean nothing if we can not force enforcement (and the WSJ believes the treaty does not have any way to force enforcement).

[AtomicKitten]

2. A couple of problems.

1) There is still no confirmation that Obama actually said how he was going to vote on Peru. I can find only one blogger out of several that reported the incident that even mentions it in an off-hand third party kind of way. Sirota appears to have jumped the gun reporting this.

2) Obama briefly answered a question specifically about Peru. Peru's FTA (Free Trade Agreement) is NOT NAFTA or CAFTA. Zulchzulu explains it all here:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x3595129#3595813

* I suppose from your admonition at the end of your OP you will consider anything deviating from your repetition of Sirota's presumptuous leap to judgment and misrepresentation a partisan move. So I leave you with the above facts to consider or disregard as you choose.

[zulchzulu]

3. Peru FTA is NOT...NOT...NAFTA!

If we want to play games, I ask this Edwards supporter why his candidate voted FOR the China Most Favored Nation Status (MFN) act, which is dreadfully more damaging than NAFTA could ever be; we lost our steel industry thanks to that infinite wisdumb as well as a lot of other jobs. Voting for the China MFN was like voting for NAFTA on steroids. The North American continent has nowhere near the population (22% of the World) and lack of environmental and human rights standards China does. So much for being a friend of American industry. A lot of mill workers are now in the Henan Province. Do a Google on North Carolina businesses that went under thanks to Edwards' vote. I'll leave his war vote for another time.

The Peru FTA is NOT NAFTA expansion. There are completely a different set of rules with the Peru deal. Unlike NAFTA, the agreement adheres to environmental laws, labor laws, health laws and fair pay. NAFTA is way off that track.

It's a flat out bullshit lie to call the Peru FTA an "expansion of NAFTA". It's like calling a banana a basketball.

Here are some of the comments from people who know what they are talking about:

Trade Subcommittee Chairman Sander Levin (D-MI):

"The Peru FTA signals a dramatic step in a new trade policy – one that takes on the essential need to expand the sharing of the benefits of expanded trade and addressing its downsides – by including for the first time enforceable worker rights and environmental standards." We have broken once and for all the failed NAFTA and CAFTA model and are charting a very different course for U.S. trade policy."

Representative Jim McDermott (D-WA):

"Trade is about people more than it is about goods and services produced; trade is about the policies and commitment of our great nation to make the world a better place. With this agreement today we are leading the world by raising the bar to a new level to protect workers and the environment. This is a defining moment and one we can be proud of."

Representative John Tanner (D-TN):

"I want to thank Chairman Rangel and Ranking Member McCrery for working together on a bipartisan agreement that will help farmers and exporters in Tennessee and elsewhere. Bipartisan support for the Peru Free Trade Agreement is critical to moving the trade agenda forward, which is a key component in securing long-term economic growth in America."

Representative Rahm Emanuel (D-IL):

"Economic security isn`t just about balancing the family budget - it`s about ensuring both American business and American employees have a place in the global economy. Chairmen Rangel and Levin`s trade bill reflects our interests and values and offers American companies the tools they need to compete and succeed."

Representative Earl Blumenauer (D-OR):

"I joined the Ways and Means Committee dedicated to advancing a new direction in honest trade. Trade policy can be used to advance our most deeply held values, such as the commitment to workers’ rights and protection of the environment. Passage of this agreement, and the groundbreaking labor and environmental standards contained within it, has already and will continue to yield real, on-the-ground benefits for these two important concerns."

Representative Ron Kind (D-WI):

"The Peru FTA represents a new day in US trade. With the leadership of Chairman Rangel and Chairman Levin, and unprecedented bipartisan cooperation, including from the Senate and the White House, this trade agreement includes everything we as democrats have been fighting years for – greater environmental standards, labor protections, and more. This remarkable agreement sets a precedent for future agreements, and will be a great benefit to the American economy and the American worker."

Representative Bill Pascrell (D-NJ):

"The Peru FTA is a meaningful step forward towards a trade policy that will benefit the working people and economies of both countries. For the first time in any trade agreement, we have established fully enforceable obligations that require FTA parties to effectively enforce core labor rights. America’s trade policy is not perfect, and I rarely find myself supporting trade agreements, but I believe this FTA marks significant progress towards a more responsible trade philosophy."

Representative Joseph Crowley (D-NY):

"Chairman Rangel and Trade Subcommittee Chairman Levin worked tirelessly to establish a bipartisan framework for crafting trade agreements. Today, the fruits of their labor took an important step forward when the House Ways and Means Committee unanimously approved the US-Peru free trade agreement. This agreement does not reflect the failed NAFTA-CAFTA model. Instead, it respects workers and the environment by including the International Labor Organization’s (ILO) five core labor standards and ensuring the enforcement of multilateral environmental agreements. I applaud Chairmen Rangel and Levin for their efforts and for starting a new chapter in our nation’s trade policies."

Representative Chris Van Hollen (D-MD):

"Today’s approval of draft legislation to implement the Peru Trade Promotion Agreement is an important step toward opening Peruvian markets for U.S. businesses," said Congressman Van Hollen. "It protects and enforces basic international labor standards, promotes access to medicines, and enforces common multilateral environmental obligations."

Representative Kendrick Meek (D-FL):

"I applaud Chairman Rangel and Chairman Levin’s strong leadership in crafting the innovative U.S. Peru Free Trade Agreement which creates new market opportunities for Florida businesses but stays true to our Democratic values. Miami is America’s gateway to Latin America and this will greatly benefit both small and large Florida businesses, while at the same time strengthening the U.S. economy."

Representative Allyson Schwartz (D-PA):

"The Peru Free Trade Agreement represents a new model for trade that will improve working conditions and strengthen environmental protections. Today’s vote is a major victory for those of us that have demanded the Administration include these standards as part of our trade agenda. "

http://waysandmeans.house.gov/news.asp?formmode=release&id=563

Sure, there will be isolationists and xenophobes bitching about the Peru FTA...at cafes where they ordered a cafe latte with coffee beans grown in Colombia...

[AtomicKitten]

4. hey

I just referenced you in the post above.

Thanks for posting this.

[illinoisprogressive]

5. No excuses but, the fact is this is a rumor taken as fact. not true. read it on his site.

[killbotfactory]

6. I thought the AFL-CIO didn't take a stand for or against this bill?

[incapsulated]

7. That is correct

They are not. Nor are they "against" it, despite what this piece says. They are taking a neutral stance, not for or against.

[incapsulated]

8. lol, defensive much?

Go ahead - waste the bandwith to make yourselves feel better, call me a liar even with all the facts, hyperlinks and data lined up against you. But huff and puff all you want --

Please, if you can't take the heat, don't bother posting threads and insulting people who will dare to contradict you before they even post.