Political Games
Even the Los Angeles Times can't stomach the Democratic candidates glaring hypocrisy on NAFTA and free trade. They are throwing the flag on this one.
The 14-year-old North American Free Trade Agreement has become a hot issue in this year's Democratic presidential campaign — in Ohio, at least. When Sens. Hillary Rodham Clinton and Barack Obama hit the hustings in the Buckeye State, they compete to be NAFTA’s biggest critic. But when they jet to Texas, which is also holding its primary Tuesday, the candidates have little or nothing to say about the pact.
The disparity illustrates two truths about major trade deals: They're a magnet for pandering, and they produce both winners and losers. Ohio, like other states in the Rust Belt, is stinging from the loss of manufacturing jobs in the years since NAFTA took effect. In Texas, however, communities near the border have blossomed with an influx of investment, jobs and workers.
And the differences haven't just been regional. The trade deals signed since 1980 have helped spur job growth for some types of workers while decreasing jobs for others. Men at the high and low ends of the career ladder have benefited, but those in the middle have suffered, while the opposite holds true for women, according to a recent study by economist Stephen Rose at the Progressive Policy Institute.
The president's job is to take the long view of what's best for the country as a whole. Although it's hard to pinpoint jobs lost or created because of NAFTA, U.S. employment has grown far beyond even pessimistic estimates of the trade deal's costs. You wouldn't know that listening to Obama, who declared in a recent speech that "trade deals like NAFTA ship jobs overseas and force parents to compete with their teenagers to work for minimum wage." His stance is echoed by Clinton, who scolded Obama's campaign for distributing a flier that said she had called NAFTA a "boon" to the economy.
They have a bunch of links backing up their statements. They point out that fighting for truly open markets in other countries is more productive. Yes, some jobs are going to be lost with free trade – but better, higher paying jobs also are gained. Rising standards in other countries mean more opportunities to sell the products of those better jobs here at home.
By sam, February 28, 2008 @ 2:28 pm
NAFTA is the favorite bogeyman for all those who think that America’s manufacturing is on the decline. Of course, it isn’t, but don’t tell that to autoworkers that have just lost their jobs. It has become a code word for industrial decline, offshoring, you name it.