David Sirota: Edwards Move Makes Trade '08 Centerpiece

[babylonsister]

Edwards Move Makes Trade '08 Centerpiece
by David Sirota | Oct 29 2007



The Financial Times headline this morning says it all: "Edwards' Attack on Peru Deal Shifts Debate." The story summarizes John Edwards (D) announcement that he is opposing not only the Peru Free Trade Agreement, but the entire package of White House-backed deals designed to expand the job-killing, wage-destroying NAFTA trade model into South America and Asia - the package of deals that a small handful of Democrats endorsed back on May 10th in a secret pact with the Bush administration. Edwards said the agreements do "not meet my standard of putting American workers and communities first, ahead of the interests of the big multinational corporations, which for too long have rigged our trade policies for themselves."

The move, consistent with Edwards' economic populist campaign, drives a wedge right through the heart of the Democratic presidential primary.

Last week, as noted here on this site, Sen. Barack Obama (D-IL) announced his support for the Peru deal, and then tried to obfuscate his position under harsh questioning. Meanwhile, Sen. Hillary Clinton (D-NY) hasn't said anything about the Peru deal.

As Public Citizen's Lori Wallach said, Edwards move now puts the spotlight on the divide between the progressive movement and what I have called the Money Party (and Edwards has called the Corporate Democrats).

"This is where the rubber hits the road and we find out how far Hillary thinks she needs to go on trade to court the Democratic base," she said. "Peru is about to go to a Senate vote so she can't duck the issue."

more...

http://www.smirkingchimp.com/thread/10712

[gateley]

1. I wonder f this issue really IS an issue to the majority of voters. I brought

it up to a friend last night and she had no idea what I was referring to. Even after I explained it a bit, she really had no interest in it at all.

If Edwards does use this as his "centerpiece" hopefully more John Q P's will pay attention and give it consideration.

[babylonsister]

3. I think workers who have been directly affected by NAFTA will

know more about this, or want to know more, and will be more concerned. And there are a lot of them.

[gateley]

4. Good - thanks. nt

[Hippo_Tron]

10. Peru is not nearly as controversial as NAFTA

The AFL-CIO is neutral on it. Some of its members are opposing, but not all of them.

[1932]

15. The AFL-CIO plays a huge role in one of the four NED arms and has a huge interest in free trade.

All the other unions which aren't part of that world fee differently about free trade.

[1932]

12. Wisconsin '04. Edwards put trade on the table and voters moved toward him dramatically.

I think I read somewhere that he was closing day-over-day on Kerry so rapidly when the only issue separating them was trade (and when that happened to be the issue that was getting press) that if the primary had been another day or two later, he would have won it.

[1932]

13. Wisconsin '04. Edwards put trade on the table and voters moved toward him dramatically.

I think I read somewhere that he was closing day-over-day on Kerry so rapidly when the only issue separating them was trade (and when that happened to be the issue that was getting press) that if the primary had been another day or two later, he would have won it.

[PollThis]

2. Thank you John Edwards, I'm glad someone is looking out for our interests. nt

[babylonsister]

5. I think he's trying, and welcome to DU! nt

[surfermaw]

6. Run John Run for the average Joe and Jill

Keep fighting John,

[waiting for hope]

7. Thanks babylonsister -

Here's another article about this issue:

Will Democrats Follow John Edwards On Trade--And Win Elections?
Jonathan Tasini

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/jonathan-tasini/will-democrats-follow-joh_b_70189.html

~Snip~

Pay attention, in particular, to Edwards' description of NAFTA:

NAFTA, which was one of our worst trade agreements ever, was written by corporate interests and insiders in all three countries, and it has served them well.

That is precisely right. There is no such thing as so-called "free trade." It is just a marketing phrase. We have always had trade among people around the global as long as humans have communicated with each other. The only question is: what are the rules under which trade takes place? It has nothing to do with being "free"--this is about establishing power.

Edwards is also quite sensitive, throughout his statement to the fate of workers outside of our country. This is so crucial to hear from a presidential candidate--if we are to repair our relations with other countries, one critical step the next president must take is to cease imposing on other countries economic systems that are crippling to the livelihoods and economic security of other people. Take this example in Edwards' statement:

The damage threatened by these NAFTA expansion agreements extends beyond the United States. Buried deep in the 800-page text of the Peru FTA are ambiguous provisions that could allow U.S. banks to demand compensation if Peru reverses its disastrous social security privatization. That's right, the Peru FTA could lock in the misery facing millions of the elderly and ill in that extremely poor country all to ensure U.S. firms can profit on what should be a government service available to all in the first place.

~Snip~

I think it's going to be a much bigger issue than people here realize.

[1932]

16. I get so excited thinking that a person could win the presidency running on these issues.

That last sentence evokes a sentiment that I embrace so powerfully, and I have NEVER heard anyone with a real chance of winning run for president on ideas like that.

It would be so great for democracy if Edwards won and issues like this were his mandate.

[BootinUp]

8. John Edwards has more

centerpieces than a Hobby Lobby store. Just sayin.

[bvar22]

9. I don't see this as a "Centerpiece",

This is merely another piece of evidence showing that John Edwards will fight for Americans who Work for a Living. Opposition to these treaties is consistent with JE's entire campaign. Of course, he is following Kucinich's lead here.

I'm a solid Kucinich supporter, but will consider JE as my compromise candidate.
I won't consider anyone more conservative or "business friendly" than John Edwards.

Elizabeth would make a wonderful 1st Lady. :)


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.

[AmBlue]

11. Isn't there a 12-step program for recovering Clarkies?

You should go join up and leave John Edwards alone. You've got nothin' on this good man and he's the only one that can win who is really fighting for regular Americans? What's wrong with that?

[cobalt1999]

14. I'm not a huge Edwards fan, but...

I like this approach much better than the "electability" centerpiece. This CAN play well...it depends on how he can tap into people's fear for the future of their jobs and the worry about their children's careers then give people confidence he is serious about building American jobs for Americans.

Edward's campaign may be learning.

[MichDem10]

17. Thank you Senator Edwards - for standing up for American Workers and Families!