Heeeeerrrre's NAFTA!!! - Democratic Underground

JackORoses

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Fri Feb-15-08 02:21 PM
Original message

Heeeeerrrre's NAFTA!!!

From NBC's Mark Murray and NBC/NJ's Carrie Dann

With the Clinton-Obama contest moving to Wisconsin (February 19) and then to Ohio (March 4), it was inevitable that NAFTA would start becoming a much bigger issue.

Many economists have viewed the North American Free Trade Agreement -- enacted during Bill Clinton's presidency -- as an overall plus for the US economy. But especially after the nation's manufacturing job losses, that five-letter trade accord has become a four-letter word in Democratic politics, particularly in the industrial Midwest.

That reality has forced Hillary Clinton to distance herself from one of the her husband's signature achievements. "Look, NAFTA did not do what many had hoped," she said at a debate in November. "NAFTA was a mistake to the extent that it did not deliver on what we had hoped it would."

In a debate a month later, Clinton called for the trade agreement to be changed. "I want to be a president who focuses on smart, pro-American trade. I will review every trade agreement. I'm going to ask for revisions that I think will actually benefit our country, particularly our workers, our exporters... And NAFTA will be part of that review, to try to reform and improve it."

But in a press conference today, Obama tried to link Clinton to her husband's NAFTA. "We are not standing on the brink of recession because of forces beyond our control. This was not an inevitable part of the business cycle," he said. "It was a failure of leadership in Washington -- a Washington where George Bush hands out billions of tax cuts to the wealthiest few year after year after year. A Washington where politicians tout NAFTA as a success when they’re in the White House and then call it a mistake when they’re on the campaign trail."

Yet as the Politico's Ben Smith has noted, beyond her husband's obvious support for the trade agreement, it's actually unclear where Hillary Clinton actually stood on it in the 1990s. But that hasn't stopped the Obama campaign from distributing mailings in Ohio like this one: "Hillary Clinton believed NAFTA was 'a boon' to our economy."

However, as Newsday and the Clinton campaign have pointed out, Clinton never said that. The actual language came from Newsday, which in 2006 put Clinton's position on trade this way: "Clinton thinks NAFTA has been a boon to the economy, but voted against the Central American-Dominican Republic Free Trade Agreement, saying it would drive jobs offshore."

Yesterday while campaigning in Wisconsin, Bill Clinton defended his wife on the issue. "Now, you can attack me on that if you want to. But she didn't have anything to do with that. She wasn't in the Senate when NAFTA was adopted."

But that then raises this question: If Hillary Clinton takes credit for the good things that happened under her husband's watch -- like the economy -- then aren't the things that weren't so good also fair game?

http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2008/02/15/668610.aspx

***

Thank you, Bill Clinton.
You killed the Albatross.
Now Hillary gets to wear it around her neck.

Let's see how they like it in Ohio.