The Obama Administration intends to meet Congressional demands to move all three pending NAFTA-style “free trade” agreements with Colombia, Korea, and Panama. David Dayen previewed this news yesterday, explaining that at a minimum, a quarter million American jobs are at risk.
Since the announcement of the Korea deal in December to Panama’s late last month, the White House has accelerated the job-killing trade deals, culminating with Congress beginning technical work on the deals starting yesterday. In those six months, the Obama Administration did a 180 with how it wants to move the deals. US Trade Representative Ron Kirk cautioned against tying the deals together in January, pushing back against Boehner’s insistence that the deals move together by calling such a move a “huge mistake”:
“I know John Boehner has spoken to the president about timing … we are seeking a hard deadline, a tight sequence for all three,” Rep. Kevin Brady (R-Texas) said.
Brady said that “whether it’s all at once or a defined sequence and timetable, we just have to get them all done.”
U.S. Trade Representative Ron Kirk made clear in a public appearance Thursday that the administration continues to resist tying the Korea free-trade agreement to the other two deals.
“We think as attractive as it might sound to some, it would be a huge mistake to force all of the trade agenda into one lump vote with Korea,” Kirk said. He added that the administration does not want to “short-circuit” the process of fixing the problems with the other two.
Fast forward to today. The Administration has not only agreed to meet Boehner’s arbitrary July 1 deadline, but is not discussing a “broader trade package” that will come to Congress this summer. While it looks likely there won’t be one vote on all 3 trade deals, you can smell Obama’s brand of compromise in the air.
“We are confident now that a free-trade agreement would be good for our country, would create jobs here in the United States, open up new markets with potential for billions of dollars of cross-border trades,” Obama told reporters in the Oval Office. “We think it would be also very good for Panama and allow additional economic exchanges between our two countries.”
“So my expectation is, is that as part of a broader trade package that we’re going to be presenting to Congress, that we’re going to be able to get this done,” he added, thanking Martinelli for “his leadership on this issue.”
The White House has made clear that Korea is its biggest priority, and has been pushing for its passage more than Colombia and Panama. Republicans and other corporate free trade Democrats have insisted that if Korea passes, Colombia and Panama must come right behind, if not with it.
So of course, Republicans see opportunity to get all 3 through so that Obama gets his Korea deal. Rep. Brady, a key trade leader in the House, has insisted from the beginning that they move together. And the US Chamber of Commerce is only happy to join that call for a “grand bargain.”
An official at the U.S. Chamber of Commerce said there could be a “grand bargain” on trade.
“In the weeks ahead, the United States has a chance to move forward in a bipartisan fashion to secure approval of the pending trade agreements with Korea, Colombia and Panama,” John Murphy, vice president for international policy at the Chamber, said in a blog post.
The Chamber is even touring the country with the South Korean ambassador to support the trade deals, and promises an ad campaign to come.
The Chamber has also been traveling the country with the South Korean ambassador promoting the deals. Since the beginning of the year, the Chamber has organized grass-roots activities in at least 10 states, including New Mexico, Colorado, Florida, Pennsylvania, North Carolina and South Carolina, said Chamber trade lobbyist Scott Eckart.
“We are putting significant resources into this, and it’s still being determined. We are going to be doing ad campaigns,” said another Chamber trade lobbyist, Christopher Wenk. “We’re not shy about pouring resources into our top priorities.”
Politico wrote that this summer would be an “epic showdown” over trade deals in Congress. Is it just me, or am I missing who’s going to be on the other side of this fight? While some labor unions have come out in opposition to all 3 trade deals, it’s hard to imagine any sort of “showdown” happening with the Administration, members of Congress in both parties, and corporate groups all pushing for rapid approval of these deals.




41 Comments

Support this site!
Subscribe to the newsletter
Advertise on Firedoglake
Send
us your tips
Make us your homepage
About FDL Action
Anything the Chamber of Commerce wants will be bad for everybody in this country but the ultra wealthy.
If one ignores unemployment entirely, it’s easy to ignore the fact that these trade deals are job-killing. It’s just part of the new narrative.
But we’re heading for a double dip that will show just how politically counterproductive all this “Grand Bargain” crap really is.
Free trade is for suckers. It is good for corporate profits, bad for American payrolls.
I suppose I could get all outraged about Obama selling out on this, but it’s a much broader problem. Once again, we simply can’t talk about the real problems. Obama and his team believe corporate profits are the economy, and they are acting accordingly.
The economy exists to serve the people, not the other way around. If the system is not providing near-full employment at living (for that area) to very good total compensation (wages/salaries/bonuses/benefits), the system is broken and needs to be fixed. Maybe corporations are part of that formula, maybe they just don’t make the cut. Whatever it takes to make the system to work for the people. How many people are saying this? Anyone? Maybe Bernie Sanders. Who else?
We aren’t on base, we aren’t at bat, the team bus hasn’t arrived at the stadium, actually we don’t have a team yet. All we have is a mascot who keeps rooting for the wrong team.
Candidate Obama promised to think outside the box but, all we get are failed trickle down Reaganomics.
Obama is going to need to kill a big bad dictator, terrorist, every week to keep his poll numbers up.
NEW JOB-LESS CLAIMS JUMP TO 8 month high
“New U.S. claims for unemployment aid unexpectedly rose last week to touch their highest level in eight months, pushed up by factors ranging from spring break layoffs to the introduction of an emergency benefits program, a government report showed on Thursday.
Initial claims for state unemployment benefits rose 43,000 to a seasonally adjusted 474,000, the highest since mid-August, the Labor Department said
Economists polled by Reuters had forecast claims dropping to 410,000. The prior week’s figure was revised up to 431,000 from the previously reported 429,000.
The four-week moving average of unemployment claims, a better measure of underlying trends, increased 22,250 to 431,250, the highest since November.
Read more: http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/05/05/us-usa-econom…”
Obama is living in La La Land!
Killing OBL did not fixed the USA economy
Obama wants to be Bill Clinton and someone told him this is the way to do it.
The Problem is Bill passed a tax increase first and I believe he cut the military budget before he passed NAFTA.
The tax increase and military spending cuts strengthened the dollar and lowered the national debt.
The results helped him 4 years later. NAFTA well it takes time to outsource that and Clinton’s deregulation of banks the consequences of which Obama is dealing with today took years to explode in part because Clinton did a few things right.
However NAFTA got Bill cash from business that outsourced, financial deregulation got Bill cash from banks Obama thinks cash will win him elections.
Normally he would be right but given the economy making voters pay attention to issues today he is wrong. Obama is fighting the last war.
Nope, sure didn’t but provided a hugely giant shiney object of distraction for the serfs who reliably got distracted by it. Hence the CoC is racing forward to endorse the off-shoring of more US jobs to the third world for the benefit of the wealthy & connected.
Libya then Iran are my guess then maybe Hugo in South America nobody sane is going after North Korea but the Pentagon is not sane still 2 years not allot of dictators and nobody was hated like Ossama.
What is currently happening in the USA
reminds me a lot of the plot in the movie Gladiator
Obama is the evil king
that keeps the serfs happy by staging gladiator fights to the death
as ROME falls a part
How does Democray End?
it ends with the serfs clapping and laughing
Agreed short term bounce at best 2 months tops before he starts going down of course Memorial day gas price hikes alone could end that. When do the college kids get out of school all those out of state college kids paying $4+ a gallon to get home should start a drop in his poll numbers.
He needs to open the strategic oil reserve now. Unless of course he is going to kill or invade oil dictators then he needs to save his fire.
If gas goes to $5 a gallon and he does not open the the strategic oil reserve then I bet he is planning another attack on an oil country soon.
I can think of no better predictor for an attack than that metric.
Sleight of hand….create a huge shiny object, while rushing through the trade deals. Way to go. USA, USA…what?
Rome fell in part because it was a slave economy we are a wage slave economy and globalization is just how we get slaves world wide. Breaking unions is like invading Greece every rich Roman had Greek slaves tutor their kids.
Crushing the teachers union achieves the same thing. Crushing Unions in general gives the rich in America skilled slaves.
Obama really needs to walk a picket line not Push free trade deals if he wants to win the election.
Unions learned from Clinton they are are already protesting this will only make the protests grow.
Yes, Obama is a conservative. Just as Clinton screwed his base two decades ago with NAFTA.
So, you going to vote for Obama & the Dems in 2012 and continue the four decade long assault on workers?
You can vote Third-Party. That will decrease Dem turnout and help elect Republicans.
You can give-up, and not vote at all. This decreases voter turnout and helps elect Republicans.
You can vote Republican and continue the four decade long assault on workers.
You are screwed no matter what you do in the 2012 elections. The only effect you can make is to vote Republican, throw Obama and the treasonous Dems out of office & maybe some true liberals will run as Dems in 2014.
The Dems are going to do nothing for you until you show them that you will not vote for them.
Naw I blame Diebold not the voters we need to step up our game on that issue or both us and Obama can both go home now.
I trust voters that are paying attention to the issues. Dems who didn’t contest Floridia and later Ohio after evidence of vote tampering deserve defeat. Wisconsin the got a judge asking for the feds to investigate her I like.
Clinton catches it for NAFTA, but his version of it had protections for workers and the environment. These were gutted by the Republicans.
In veiw of what they are getting from O, do Republicans have any incentive to run a credible candidate in 2012? They might be better off to nominate one of the freaks, then leave the Democrats with the albatross of a wrecked economy around their necks in 2016. (Yes, of course we know the Republicans will not fix the wrecked economy. Their great virtue will be that they are not-Democrats.)
What ever happened to the Obama who got elected in part because he said he would end NAFTA?
Given the economy today is he brain dead! Ending NAFTA got him votes in a good economy pushing more NATFA’s now will cause Unions to either stay home or vote for everyone but him. I see a bunch of blank voter cards where it says vote for President unless the GOP gets a brain and runs against these trade deals, NAFTA and for tariffs.
there is a cool article about warehouse workers for riteaid today on alt.
They have to cut taxes and create jobs GOP voters know anyone one branch of government can stop laws from passing say what you want about the Tea Baggers but they offer no excuses for weak leaders and don’t settle for what can get passed politically.
Ourside can learn that. Learn from your enemies they did not become threats if they were totally incompetent.
“I see a bunch of blank voter cards where it says vote for President unless the GOP gets a brain and runs against these trade deals, NAFTA and for tariffs.”
In honor of Obama, they could vote “present” on their voter cards.
Obama was the first Democrat I voted for as President since Dukakis. I’m pretty sure he will get by without my vote this time.
Forget about the Prez election this cycle, it’s a lost cause. Concentrate on the down-ticket races, particularly the primaries. Absolutely vote, just vote 3rd party for Prez.
september 14 1993
William Clinton remarks:
Obama:
“
wow.
In his world, facts don’t matter.
It’s really interesting, the thread of the same people running through all of these things, right back to the days of Nixon.
Candidate Obama promised to renegotiate NAFTA. Shame on you, Barack Obama.
where can i find the analysis for “a minimum, a quarter million American jobs are at risk?”
thanks.
I have a technical question:
If these are free trade “treaties,” then don’t they require two-thirds vote to ratify in the US Senate? If so, then only 34 votes against are sufficient to block them, no?
has anyone read the proposed deals? if they are anything like nafta, the only thing they have to do with “free trade” is that the words are in the title.
A gain of 60K jobs, a loss of 250K jobs. Damn, what a good damn deal. Can someone please tell how Obama gets away with saying he’s a progressive Democrat, when he’s clearly more conservative than two Republicans, Eisenhower and Nixon. What qualifies as a “Progressive” in our movement anymore?
free trade is like free markets.
it doesn’t exist.
i’m seriously skeptical of the claim “a minimum, a quarter million American jobs are at risk”
is there anyone who can walk me through the logic?
No, I don’t think anyone but a handful of technocrats have “read” the proposed deal.
I recall an effort by a friend years ago to read and decipher the actual text of NAFTA. It was nearly impossible, even for a reasonably well-educated individual. That is why all the politicians, journalist, activists, etc. rely on the summaries and descriptions of the treaties, rather than the treaty texts themselves.
The treaties are written, of course, for the purpose of obscuring the identities of the true beneficiaries. See
http://ustraderep.gov/Trade_Agreements/Bilateral/Republic_of_Korea_FTA/Final_Text/Section_Index.html
and tell me what the hell we are supposed to make of it.
This is yet another example of the Obama Administration’s real priorities:
“SEC Steps In To Bail Out Chinese IPO Bubble, Activates Short Sale Rule 201 In Plummeting RenRen” (May 5, 2010)
WTF! Besides the offshoring the offshore to keep the wage rates at slave status, I suspect the bankstas will get a green flag to offshore more of their shell game in South Korea where it can’t be watched and regulated just like they did with India (black money interviews with Assange part 1 and part 2) and China (as I previously analyzed and posted about).
Great to have the link but as a case in point, “12. Cross-Border Trade in Services” doesn’t say a lot, does it? Looks like treaty boiler plate to me.
Thanks for deleting my comment, mod. Nice to know objection to foul language is selective around here.
I don’t know what to make of the text.
For one thing, this is the old text from the treaty as signed by Bush. The Trade Rep’s site does not appear to include any of new language or modifications made in the latest round of talks with Obama administration officials.
I also question whether all the relevant side letters and memoranda are included.
Would it be too much to ask for a blue ribbon commission to evaluate the effects of NAFTA before we launch into more deals?
We all know these FTAs cost low-skilled Americans their jobs. We all know that environmental safeguards are inadequate. Why the rush?
I think this Cory Doctorow segment at time points 2:36 – 2:50 (Apr. 14, 2011) sums up what is going on here.
there are lots of assertions being made and i don’t see the logic of the jobs claims.
doesn’t mean i don’t think these bills should be filed in the circular file for other reasons if they are at all like previous “free trade” bills: financial deregulation, corporate rights that interfere with local environmental and other laws, trips… and lots more.
but the jobs claims don’t make much sense to me at all.
I don’t think there is any real-world logic to the jobs claims, good, bad or indifferent.
My understanding is that the numbers that get batted around are the product of some airy-fairy economic modelling that gets produced at places like the Chamber of Commerce and the Cato Institute.
You never see the issue of jobs addressed directly in the free trade agreements because these treaties have nothing to do with jobs at all. They are about the protection and promotion of very specific corporate privileges.
@Bruce H. Vail May 6th, 2011 at 7:20 am
my bold.:
ding! ding! ding!
nothing to do with free trade (whatever that is) either.