Edwards against "Peru Free Trade Agreement, Obama supports Bush, Hillary silent

[Ninga]

http://www.mydd.com/story/2007/10/27/201126/62




Environmental Groups and Labor Unions Oppose the Peru FTA

Meanwhile, no labor unions have endorsed the Peru FTA. In fact, a number of environmental groups and key Unions oppose the Peru FTA. The AFL-CIO notes that in addition to the several issues of concern to working families, particularly with respect to investment, procurement and services, The Peru FTA "will likely impose economic hardship on some of the sizeable rural and poor population of Peru." (AFL-CIO Legislative Alert:PDF)

Change To Win, which includes the Service Employees International Union, the International Brotherhood of Teamsters and the United Brotherhood of Carpenters and Joiners of America and represents over 6 million workers, issued a statement urging Democratic leaders to "Vote No on Peru Free Trade Agreement NAFTA Expansion.

John Edwards Opposes Peru Free Trade Agreement

John Edwards, who holds the largest bloc of union member endorsements, opposes the expansion of the NAFTA model with the Peru trade deal. Edwards, who does not accept federal lobbyist donations, has called for measures that will benefit American workers and not just big corporations.

Today, the Edwards for President Campaign issued a Press Release detailing Senator Edwards' opposition to the Peru Free Trade Agreement:

REJECTING THE PERU DEAL

George Bush is trying to expand the NAFTA approach to Peru, Panama, South Korea and Colombia. NAFTA was written by corporate interests and insiders in the U.S., Canada and Mexico, but workers have lost out, both American and Mexican. Under NAFTA, the U.S. has lost more than 1 million jobs, while average wages for Mexican manufacturing workers have fallen by 12 percent.

- Despite progress on labor and environmental standards, worker rights are no stronger than George Bush's willingness to enforce them. He has proven his indifference to workers through seven years of inaction.

- Congress should not pass further trade deals without first taking steps to address the stagnant wages and insecurity caused by globalization. Congress needs to adopt universal health care, reform the tax code, strengthen unions, and expand and renew trade adjustment assistance.

- The four trade deals which have been proposed establish expansive investor rights that actually create incentives to further relocate U.S. jobs overseas, by compensating corporations if our environmental, health or even local zoning laws allegedly undermine their expected profits. They also unfairly allow foreign corporations to challenge many of our laws.

- The proposed deals even limit how we can spend our own tax dollars by banning many Buy America policies.

Obama Supports the Peru Free Trade Agreement

Barack Obama: World's Worst Negotiator

Barack Obama announced his support for President Bush's bid to expand the North American Free Trade Agreement to Peru.

Yup - Obama is once again helping pass one of President Bush's top priorities - even as Bush blocks the entire Democratic agenda and daily rains rhetorical abuse down on Democratic heads. Is this how Obama is going to negotiate in the White House?

I don't know for sure if Obama honestly felt that the Peru Free Trade Agreement was, on balance, the right thing to do, or whether he just wanted to curry favor with the major corporations whose financial support is fueling his campaign. It's probably a little of both.

Obama, along with the DLC, the pro business U.S. Chamber of Commerce and Bush, supports the Peru Free Trae Deal as reported in TomP's diary: Obama Supports Peru Trade Pact that Unions and Many Progressives Oppose

Hillary Clinton is Silent on the Peru Free Trade Agreement

Hillary Clinton, who continues to accept federal lobbyist donations from multi-national corporations made a somewhat ambigous statement with regard to trade policies in early October: "It is time that we assess trade agreements every five years to make sure they are meeting their goals or make adjustments if they are not, and we should start with doing that with Nafta." Yet, Hillary thus far, has failed to issue a formal statement on whether or not she will oppose the Peru Free Trade Agreement.

Hillary's silence on the Peru Free Trade Agreement coupled with her partnerships with big corporations and ambigious statements, has left many wondering if her words are merely "coded language."

Hillary Clinton's coded message on US trade policy

However, Clinton doesn't want her position to be fully understood by the majority of her American audience. Yet you may trust that leaders of the anti- social dumping movement in the European Union and organizers for globalized unions had no problem decoding her message.

[acmavm]

1. See, Barry and Hils are two of a kind. But she's sneaky where he is

out in the open for the corporatists in this country.

The people of Peru, what do they want? Oh yeah, who give a damn. Right?

[truedelphi]

18. Actually I think it's true that the people of Peru get to vote on this issue.

At least the populaces of several So American and Central American countries vote on this issue, unlike here where our bought out Congress Critters pretend that "Free Trade" is beneficial to all.

Recently, in one South American country, the people took to the streets and ousted three or four governments in a row in order to ensure a real democracy. Did it in a matter of six or seven weeks.

Of course we hear nothing about this on the news.

[ChairmanAgnostic]

2. she's waiting on polling data before deciding to consider

a range of positions that she will nuance to sound like she is saming something without saying anything.

[cuke]

4. And Obama supports it

I guess he doesnt even care about what the people think of it

[ChairmanAgnostic]

11. How true. he does such a good job all by himself.

his 15 minutes are almost up. And that is before the Illinois GOP shares their Rezko data.

[tkmorris]

12. And they are both wrong.

Edwards has it right, once again.

[waiting for hope]

3. Here's an excellent Diary

over at Kos talking about the same thing: http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2007/10/27/152641/14 On Edit, sorry, it's the same story..but I offer more reponses!

K&R for Edwards!

[gateley]

5. Here's Biden's record if you're interested.

Joseph R. Biden

Sen. Biden (D-DE) in general espouses free trade policies but has been a recent critic of Bush administration bilateral and regional agreements on opening markets. He voted against the creation of FTAs with Oman in 2006 and with Singapore and Chile in 2003. He also voted against the Central America Free Trade Agreement (CAFTA) in 2005. All of those bills were passed in the Senate. Biden criticized CAFTA, as well as the Singapore and Chile bilateral deals because, he said, they lacked effective provisions to ensure enforcement of labor and environmental standards.

Biden also voted against the Trade Act of 2002, which reauthorized the Andean Trade Preference Act (ATPA), granting certain trade benefits to Bolivia, Colombia, Ecuador, and Peru. In 1999, Biden voted in favor of the Africa Free Trade bill, which authorized a “new trade and investment policy for sub-Sahara Africa” and the granting of trade benefits to Caribbean countries. Through that bill, the U.S. tied trade benefits for sub-Saharan African countries to those countries’ free market and democratic policies. Biden also voted for the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) in 1993.

[GeminiProgressive]

6. well that

definately pushes more towards Edwards.

[gateley]

7. This information is important for those who may be considering Biden, so

I just wanted to make it easily available. No agenda.

[Ninga]

8. Thanks. We must do all we can to elevate the political discourse and inform when and where we can.

Thanks.

[Ninga]

9. Thanks for the K & R's. We must do all we can to help Edwards.

[Judi Lynn]

10. Thanks so much for posting this information. Had not heard it before today.

It tells one a lot, by all means.

Those FTA's should be put where the sun doesn't shine. Their destructive power was known long ago. What a shame certain kinds of people are still trying to ram them through, and others blithely support them. Loathesome.

Could be some people need more time to research, and/or it could be some people need time to get in touch with their "moral compasses!"

[MethuenProgressive]

13. Edwards is so jealous....

As a Senator, he couldn't care less about the people of Peru. Being stuck in 4th place behind a guy not even running, has driven him to extremes of desperation. "Peru"? He thinks people are going to change their minds about him over Peru? Wow...

[Ninga]

14. And you have HOW much experience serving as a Senator??? Are you serving in elected office?

Have you ever run a campaign?


A Senator does not do the job of a President
A Congressman does not do the job of a Senator
A Governor does not do the job of a Senator
A Mayor does not do the job of a Governor
A Dog Catcher does not do the job of a Mayor


All are beholden to the people who have elected them.


But I think you really do know all of this already.

[MethuenProgressive]

16. So, we're not allowed to post unless we've been US Senators?

:rofl:

[robinlynne]

15. It's not about Peru. It's about several countries. It is just called the Peru Free Trade agreement.

jeez.

[PurityOfEssence]

19. He voted against free trade with Chile and Singapore, like Biden and Dodd, and unlike Clinton

This was when they were all Senators.

If you listen to or read his stump speeches from early '03, they're mostly about economics and how the current administration is shifting the tax burden from passive income to wage earning.

Jealous? Does your Mommy know you're on the computer?

[Ninga]

17. I think I will just kick this one more time......

[killbotfactory]

20. Labor groups are having a mixed reaction to the deal

When the Peru agreement was first negotiated by the Bush Administration, it looked a lot like NAFTA and CAFTA, treaties with Mexico and Central America that Congress approved despite vigorous opposition from unions. But Democrats took control of the House and Senate at the beginning of this year, and signaled to the Bush Administration that they wouldn’t ratify any trade treaty unless enforceable workers rights and environmental protection provisions were added. To the surprise of many, the White House conceded the point, and quickly negotiated the additional clauses on treaties with Peru, Panama, South Korea and Colombia.

The labor rights part of the treaty requires that both Peru and the United States enforce the “core” labor standards of the International Labor Organization, including a ban on forced labor or child labor, protection against discrimination, and the right of workers to unionize. If either country fails to enforce these rights, the other country can file a trade complaint, which could in theory lead to trade sanctions.

http://nwlaborpress.org/2007/10-5-07Trade.html

[Hippo_Tron]

21. Kudos to Obama for supporting this agreement