Kerry, Edwards Refuse to Join Kucinich in Protecting U.S. Jobs

[The Sushi Bandit]

http://www.kucinich.us/pressreleases/pr_022604.php

Congressman Dennis Kucinich tonight challenged Senators John Edwards and John Kerry to save American jobs by joining him in his pledge to cancel the North American Free Trade Agreement. Both refused.

In a nationally televised debate on CNN, Kucinich said that because of NAFTA and the U.S.'s membership in the World Trade Organization, not only are American jobs being "outsourced" to foreign countries, but the U.S. is powerless to stop foreign nations from unfair competitive practices. Kucinich cited an occasion when Congress was unable to protect American steel jobs from foreign competition because the WTO overruled the legislation.

Kucinich renewed his pledge to cancel NAFTA and the WTO by executive order as his first act in office.

Neither Kerry nor Edwards would commit to canceling NAFTA. Kerry voted for NAFTA and has consistently voted for other comparable trade agreements. Kerry and Edwards both voted for the China trade agreement.

Kucinich has been consistent in his opposition to so-called free trade.

Edwards and Kerry both discussed plans to "fix" the trade agreements. The fact is they cannot be altered. Any proposed change can be overruled by the WTO.

Free trade agreements have resulted in the loss of millions of American manufacturing jobs. Internationally, they have failed to uphold workers rights and environmental standards.

A Kucinich administration would return to bilateral trade conditioned on workers rights, human rights, and environmental quality principles.

[mhr]

1. Go Dennis Go! The Man With The Right Plan For America!

eom

[mmm]

2. Once again, Dennis shows principles where all others fail.

[leyton]

3. That's assuming cancelling NAFTA is the *only* option.

There are alternatives. You may believe (with good reason perhaps) that cancelling NAFTA is the best option, but don't spin that into "Kerry and Edwards don't want to protect jobs."

[rdfi-defi]

7. "there are alternatives" ?

and what are thoes alternatives? and please do not say "fixing" nafta, cafta.......that is a violation of wto rules. the us would be put under sanctions. one of the reasons we need to get out of these "ageements" is because it underminds democratic input by individual citizens.

as far as edwards and kerry wanting to protect american jobs, i am sure that they do. just not at the expence of the corpratists who pay for their campaigns and aproove their media coverage. you can not have it both ways, which is why people who know the issue and look at it from a working class perspective oppose nafta/wto.

[leyton]

26. There is no turning back the clock.

Globalization has begun, and besides, we can't just unilaterally be pulling out of treaties. I believe there are provisions in NAFTA that allow fair trade enforcement - we need those. As for sanctions - call me naive or arrogant but I don't foresee the US being put under sanctions. Our economy is pretty important to the rest of the world. It's not the same as putting sanctions on a country like Iraq.

[redqueen]

41. We've already been unilaterally pulling out of treaties

The only difference is Kucinich isn't doing it to build nuclear bombs -- he's going to do it to save democracy from the rising tyranny of multinational corporations.

If you think I'm exaggerating you're not paying attention.

[mac2]

45. Making new agreements all the time...like FTAA

Don't know what FTAA is? Read about it on Public Citizen or the AFL-CIO web site under Trade.

FTAA is NAFTA on steroids.

[redqueen]

48. I hope to God for all our sakes that people who vote know about FTAA!

These agreements are anti-democratic.

They allow multinational corporations to escape the rule of law - ANY law, ANYWHERE these agreements are in force.

They also allow these corporations to raid our taxpayer treasuries if we even TRY to keep them from polluting water, for example, or for jeapordizing safety in ANY way.

Corporate control, globally. Think about it.

:scared:

Sure, trade is inevitable, global trade or 'globalization' as well.

But THESE AGREEMENTS WERE NOT HANDED DOWN BY GOD!

They CANNOT BE CHANGED! We have to SCRAP them and start from SCRATCH!

[mac2]

50. You're willing to go off the cliff with the other sheep?

Where was NAFTA when the Enron world corporation was found to be criminal? Hallibruton, Tyco, Merrill Lynch...etc. Did they take action to protect us under "fair trade enforcement".

Did they even say Kenny Lay...you crook?? Get in here and explain this to us? Enron did business all over the world...not just California. They threatened leaders of India, etc.

This trade organization is about profit and profit for the few..nothing to do with better government or opening trade for countries.

[leyton]

51. That's not NAFTA's function...

NAFTA is not around to put Kenneth Lay in handcuffs.

But obviously your best way to convince me was to call me a sheep, because now I'm listening all the more attentively... :rolleyes:

[mojo2004]

4. It is funny....

Kerry and Edwards talk and talk about jobs, but don't offer specifics. If they are not gonna completely redo NAFTA, I can't see how they can possibly change things. Manufacturing is still gonna be leaving the country.

[Padraig18]

5. How many times is this press release going to be posted?

This is at LEAST the third time that I'm personally aware of.

[H2O Man]

6. Kind of makes you wonder....

...about what motivates people to keep posting a divisive & absolutely untrue thing on here?

[revcarol]

8. Take it up with Kucinich, not the poster.

The U. S. is hemorraghing jobs, and Edwards and Kerry say they want to end it.So, Edwards says he is going to "fix" NAFTA or "renegotiate"
and WE CAN'T, because the secret tribunals of the WTO would put us under sanctions and charge the U.S. $$BILLIONS in fines.

Kerry is even more weasely and says that all trade agreements that HE VOTED FOR would be "reviewed " within 120 days of taking office. Feel better yet?

BOTH of them voted for free trade with China. China trade was 10% of our trade deficit last year and the percentage is GROWING.Just check your local WalMart.

So if you think that electing solutions that can't work and "reviewing" trade agreements is going to stop the massive outflow of jobs, I've got a bridge...

[asthmaticeog]

16. Divisive?

What the hell kind of a criticism is "divisive?" What's the point of a discussion board if everyone agrees not to post anything someone might disagree with? And that IS what people mean when they claim something's "divisive." And what was posted is absolutely true - I watched that debate, all that was claimed to have been said was in fact said.

[mac2]

46. Until people pay attention to it.

It is a very important issue. Our democracy and way of life is not being stolen by Bin Laden but by these bad trade unions and agreements.

You know how important Bin Laden is. This is even more critical.

Why do you think people are in the streets all over the world about this issue? They're trying to educate people about it.

At the Boston Convention, we should demand candidates address the problem and move to disban FTAA, Americas Union, etc.

We need Progressive support like Kucinich to do so.

[PurityOfEssence]

9. Tactical Disengagement is the hardest maneuver of all

It's great to say that he'll just cancel it, but there would be immediate layoffs and unexpected consequences. This borders on recklessness, even if one thinks the thing should be ended.

Kucinich would be better off to express it as he does his plan with Iraq (U.N. in, U.S. out) which is a realistic plan to have a transition based on an assumption of duties and then a handover.

To walk in and flatly cancel something so thoroughly permeating our and others' economies is wrong for two major reasons: the abruptness will definitely cause major financial hardship, and it'll scare the crap out of people. The act of making such a grandiose and sweeping move like that is even beyond Dean's brand of flamboyance. Hell, a President has to have an even hand and realize he's steering a supertanker; he can't just take the wheel, turn hard a-port and floor it, not only will he spook everyone in sight, but he'll hurt people and diminish the trust in the administration.

Edwards is more cautious and methodical; you can see it in his platform. He's systematic and perhaps too gradual, but it more accurately mirrors human activity, whether it plays as well before the faithful or not. Government is supposed to be a source of safety and confidence as it goes about its business; most people don't want to be bothered about what its doing, they want to go about their lives. If you think that's pandering to the lazy, I submit that people are mostly that way and they'll never change. Mankind is not perfectable; we're as good and bad as we'll ever be. That doesn't mean that safeness is the best thing in the world, it means that the way one does things is very important.

I really hate simplistic answers; they don't work. Life is complicated and it needs to be addressed as such. Just because Edwards doesn't want to draw his sword on the Gordian Knot doesn't mean he's playing games, it just means that he has a different plan.

[Mairead]

10. You badly need to check your facts, I think

Do you really not understand how these things work? Ending participation in a particular trade agreement is not like cutting the ignition wires in a car. It doesn't cause trade to stop. Trade goes right on just as though nothing had happened. All that happens is that the old rules are no longer enforceable. The participants might agree that some version of them will go on being enforced while new agreements are being sorted, but no participant can DEMAND that they be.

[PurityOfEssence]

35. He's proposing extreme abruptness

Things do not go on as if nothing happened, that's an incredible pronouncement. Business abhors uncertainty and skittishness; there would be many shutdowns and pullbacks by many concerns just out of bottom-line paranoia.

The very idea of extremeness like this puts fear into people far and wide. Companies doing icky things to the innocent abroad will shutter their operations, thus throwing out workers here, there and in between. It won't necessarily be panic in the streets, but things are very precarious right now; the outward calm and seeming viability of the world's economy is mostly wishful thinking. A little disruption will go a long way.

Beyond that, threads like this are irritating, because the title of it presumes that his approach is the only one that helps American workers, and any other is scorning their well-being. There are many ways to kill the proverbial cat, and saying that one's own way is the only one is quite presumptuous.

Quick and radical changes in economies are very dangerous. We've gone quite a way down the wrong path to just say "fuck this trail, let's just cut through the woods"; there are some mighty scary things in those woods. So enough forced metaphors. Big changes cause unexpected things to happen; a little gentleness often gets you there faster and with less trouble than the seemingly direct route. Regardless, saying that anything short of a draconian measures is unfeeling to workers or mealy-mouthed is just plain wrong. There are different approaches, and they don't necessarily prove unfeeling duplicity on the part of their proponents.

[Mairead]

36. How about some citations to support those rather apocalyptic assertions?

Because frankly I think you're talking rubbish. There is no reason for people to stop trading unless they reckon a war is going to start or there's going to be a huge monetary revaluation somewhere...and for some those would actually be incentives.

[rdfi-defi]

11. all you offer is loose metaphors,

no real sollutions to the problem. getting out of nafta/wto would not "spook everyone in sight." it would not spook me, and i seriously doubt it would spook millions of other working class people around the US. maybe you do not consider working folks "in sight," i don't know, but all your talk about simplistic answers and life is complicated just seems to be smoke and mirrors.

[trumad]

12. DK thinks that he can waltz right in

and change the world because he commands it... It seems he forgets that there's another obstructionist party that would stop him flat....

Hell...why he's at it, why doesn't he promise free dinner at the Olive Garden every Friday night for every citizen of the United States? Or free HBO for all Hispanics, or free cell phones for all teenagers...

Sorry..but in today's politics it helps to live in the real world....

[revcarol]

13. Treaties and trade agreements are a function of THE PRESIDENCY!!

Before you continue on your misinformation campaign, you might check THE FACTS.

THE PRESIDENT, ANY PRESIDENT, CAN WITHDRAW US from one of these agreements according to the terms of the agreement:NAFTA and the WTO, SIX MONTHS NOTICE.(Repulicans would have NO SAY in the process, because they are NOT the President.)

Spouting off into outer space while ignoring the facts doesn't help your candidate.

[trumad]

14. So can single payer health be inacted as soon as he walks in?

What...you don't think Repukes will retaliate for his actions... Sure DK can flip Nafta but they will make him pay big time by shutting down everyhting he wants in the future... The problem with Dk folks is that they think all his plans will be easily obtained... DK's great if there's no repukes in the world...

[revcarol]

18. Did you hear DK say ANYTHING would be easy?

Repugs will stalk and punish ANY Democratic President, just like they did Clinton.
And this thread is about NAFTA and the WTO.

[mac2]

47. Congress gave the President Fast Track....

ability to make trade agreements which was unconstitutional.

Our founding father's gave it to the Congress only. Why? Representatives would be answerable to their constituents about agreements made that effect them locally.

Denns would give back trade agreements responsibility to where it belongs..to the people not King George.

Fast Track is very dangerous. A President can/and is (Haiti) abusing this power. For example: If you grow rice at a higher price than Argentina, we will over throw your government (President now has power to declare war by Congress). He can threaten with all the power of the government behind him to get what he wants from any country on earth. This is abuse of power.

How about getting our Constitution and Bill of Rights back?

[rdfi-defi]

15. i am still waiting for someone to explain an alternative plan

that stops millions of US jobs from going to the lowest over-seas bidder, and avoids billions in wto sanctions from being leveled at the US.

[redqueen]

42. You won't get an alternative plan.

The other candidates' plans are a) change some tax laws and do a study (Kerry), or b) change some tax laws (Edwards).

Either way, corporate control of governments worldwide is ensured.

[mac2]

49. Congress has promised constituents better trade agreements

in the past with China, etc. They have hearings make a lot of noise but do little. We've had it!!!

Now that they are loaning money us to pay off our ever increasing debt, will we have power to threaten or do anything to change this fright train going into a wall of bankruptcy?

[zulchzulu]

17. Kucinich never mentions economic chaos that would occur if we left NAFTA

Has anyone taken Kucinich to the mat on what would happen if we left NAFTA and the WTO like he wants?

There would be economic chaos in Canada, Latin America, Europe, the US and parts of Asia if we did what Kucinich wanted.

No one ever mentions that economic reality. Isolationism is not the answer. Refer to Hoover and his economic policies in the early 1930s to see what that brand of "brilliance" brought to the World economy.

NAFTA needs to be mended, not ended. And Kucinich has about as much chance of being President as the cashier at your local McDonald's. He should have dropped out months ago.

[revcarol]

19. Bull roar.

Planning your withdrawal, and using the fine career people of the commerce department and others to form bi-lateral trade agreements is eminently doable and will not cause "economic chaos."

NO "isolationism" in bi-lateral trade agreements!! WHERE are you getting your false information from? Certainly not from www.kucinich.us
He is for more mutual cooperation for the benefit of BOTH countries, NOT CONTINUED CORPORATE IMPERIALISM.

EDIT: see post 15 about "mending" NAFTA. If we tried to "mend" NAFTA, the WTO would sock us for $$millions in fines for EACH incident in which foreign investors could claim they lost profits or POTENTIAL PROFITS!!

[rdfi-defi]

21. we can't "mend" nafta without wto approval.

doing so would put the US under economic sanctions. but you know all about the under minding of democracy by these trade agreements. so what is the answer? by not putting forward even the hint of a plan, you are basically saying we should just accept the loss of millions of US jobs.

getting out of nafta/wto is not isolationism. bilateral trade is still trade. the economy will still function, it has to, big biz can not just walk away from the largest market in the world. sure they will not like it, but hey, individuals are more important than the bottom line.

your attempt at scare tactics are childish. please tell me do you consider your job safe from the 'race to the bottom'? 10 years ago working people believed clinton that their jobs would be safe, and nafta was implemented. today people are waking up to see that is not true. unless you only invest for a living, capitol flight will touch your job sector as well.

something else i think we loose sight of is the fact that the state (or city) issue business licenses which give a business the approval to do business. the state is an extension of the people, why would the people give permission to these entities to send jobs and capitol over-seas to undercut our standard of, no, our ability to live?

we need a candidate to stand up and protect our jobs.

[Mairead]

37. How about some support for those empty assertions, huh?

[Scott Lee]

20. I am shocked beyond belief. The horror!

[sangha]

22. DK just lost my primary vote

I'm a Kerry supporter who lives in NY. Since NY seems to be going for Kerry big-time, I thought I'd vote strategically, and pull the lever for DK. Now, I don't think so

[mac2]

44. You favor losing our democracy to a World Union?

govenment/trade organization? FTAA isn't just trade agreements. Fact is, even the coup in Haiti is a plan to set up this FTAA with cheap labor. The few elite rule..without a democracy.

Go to Public Citizen and look under their trade section. Become informed. I doubt you supported Dennis and are now changing because, he wants out of NAFTA. It's been one of his primary issues all along.

Kucinich represents the people who sent him to Washington like Wellstone..not corporate interest. Corporations have enough wealth and power to represent their interests...the ciitzens do not.

[littlejoe]

23. You've got them both figured out. Neither one of them will be

happy until every man and woman is jobless, penniless and homeless. Kucinich is GOD. Long Live King Dennis!

[rdfi-defi]

24. your attempt at sarcasm is weak

as i said in post #7, it is not that they want people to be out of work, they just won't do what it takes to protect US jobs.

if you don't think that getting out of nafta/wto is a good idea, that is fine, all you have to do is put forward some plan or idea that address the problem.

this is a huge issue, why won't any pro nafta dems address it?

let's figure something out together.......pretty please, with sugar on top

[littlejoe]

27. So is this thread.

[Nicholas_J]

25. Such a policy would fail miserably.

ASthe E.E.C. has overwhelmingly proven. By putting an end to bi-lateral agreements, and entering into a regionally based traty agreement, the European community is rapidly outpacing the U.S.

Since becoming and E.E.C. nation, one of Western Europes poorest nations,Ireland, now has the one of the highest standards of living in the E.E.C. Ireland is now second only to Finland in standard of living in Europe, outpacing the Scandinavian nations, whch once held this position.

The psoples of the individual nations are not pleased with the rules and regulations that they must follow now, but they would not like to give up the higher incomes and lifestyles that the abanadonment of bi-lateralism has afforded them. Spain and Portugal are two other rags to riches stories which resulted from getting away from old worn out economic and trade ideas, and moving forward into accepting participation in a larger, global community. Kucinich is making one critical assumtion which is already being proven wrong. That the rest of the world will agree to bi-lateralism, which recent events at the W.T.O. and the E.E.C. are disproving. These bodies have already started to finally stop talking about U.S. laws that protect U.S. manufaturing, and started acting, with tarifffs, quotas, and boycotts of American products. They do not base this on the U.S. breaking bi-lateral trade agreements, but on its breaking of multilateral and global trade agreements. The U.S. has a massive trade deficit. The one weapon that the rest of the world has against the U.S. is sticking togetther in global agreements. They cannot defeat us militarily, but they can bury us economically by sticking together on economic issues. Kucinich's ideas come from a past in which U.S. workers could compete with workers of other nations. No longer true. The jobs that Kucinich is attempting to protect are no longer skilled labor, but have been made relatively unskilled by the use of more advanced technologies. Aside from cost saving, the fact is, that the jobs being outsourced can be done by untrained workers. Anything Kucinich attemts to do will simply be protecting essentially unskilled jobs, that can are are being proven to be able to be done by unsilled, uneducated workers. Protect them here, and the Germans, French, British, and Canadians wil start outperforming U.S. companies. The results will then not be outsourcing, but the complete end of production by American workers. It happened in the electronics sector. When was the last television set produced in the United States? It wasnt outsourcing that resulted in this, but sheer uncompetitiveness of U.S. businesses in that sector.Protection a la Kucinich was attempted, but resulted in the even quiker demise of the industry. There is simply no way to protect America njobs thaqt have been made obsolete by American techology. And even that is becoming questionable. THe techologies which are making skilled labor unskillled are even now being creates in other counties, nt the U.S.
When Bulgaria starts passing the U.S. in robotics, there is a serious problem/ It wount be fixed by bi-lateral trade agreements.

In fact NAFTA itself was created in order to deal with the ever growing economic threat of the E.E.C.

But as usual, Europeans do it right, and conservatives get involves and sabotaged NAFTA. NAFTA is the only reasonable alternative to the E.E.C. But the treaty must be abided by, and moved forward as scheduled. WHile CLinton was in office, it was largely NAFTA that was responsible for the creation of 22 million jobs. THey were new jobs in new or retooled industries, but for every job lost to Mexico and Canada, five were created to replace them, and Democratic adhereance to the treaties terms made sure that new busineses were able to train new workers for new industries.

[rdfi-defi]

28. thank you for that informed response

we have 2 threads going at once, which would you prefer?

[Nicholas_J]

30. I think Kucinich is great

All of his other platform stances are very forward looking, but his trade policies are very very old fashioned democrat, and they all rely on two things. One is that the other nations will agree to bi-lateral treaties, and not continue on the appraent track they are taking, to boycott. place tariffs on, opr simply ban imports of American Products. And that the U.S. is stil the mighty superpower that can force these bi-lateral treaties on the rest of the world, which would require doing something like going to war with the rest of the world to force regime changes, which seems to be contrary to Kucinic's peace agenda. While the other industrialized nations cannot defeat the U.S militarily, they do know how to hold togetther as a group to defeat the U.S. economically, and they will not easily give up this element of power they do control becaue Kucinich wants to protect U.S. workers. I am surprised at Kucinich's complete lack of intelligence in this area, as he seems to be pretty smart everywhere else. His trade policy would be the econommic version of the invasion of Iraq.

[rdfi-defi]

32. i understand what you are saying, however,

i do not agree that withdrawing from nafta is the economic version of the invasion of iraq. the invasion of iraq was done for the benefit of the few, in fact many of the world's citizens protested the war before it began (an unprecedented statement), they knew the war was unjustified and would harm many many people. nafta and the other "free" trade agreements also harm many many people while benefiting the few. we have been discussing this from an american perspective, and rightly so, but if you observe the economic liberalization agenda globally, the number of people harmed increases dramatically. i agree there are risks, (i acknowledged this in the other thread), but the current path will lead to the under minding of democracy, both politically and economically.

you are very well informed, and i respect what you are saying as your belief, but the only answer i see coming from the pro-nafta crowd is........all you working, and poor people just grin and bare it, we know what we are doing, ignore the signs and trust us. i just can't accept that. maybe i am misunderstanding you?

[Nicholas_J]

34. Right now

Effective today, the E.U. has put santions into effect which will cost the U.S. 300 million in trade this year and double to 600 million next year, for far less protectionism than Kucinich is suggesting. This alone will likely result in several hundred thousand jobs more being lost over the next 18 months. Kucinich's suggestions for bi-lateral trrade will resultin complete stoppage of European trade, as Europeean nations cannot engage in bi-lateral trade and remain in the E.U. All much treaties must be made through the E.U. alone.

All based on the WTO declaring U.S. tax laws that favor U.S. businesses to be illegal subsidies. The "PROCTECTING" of jobs which are being said to not be protectionist will result in far more severe sanctions being placed on the U.S. Costing more jobs. As Kerry has said, there is only so much we can sell to ourselves, and sanctions by other naitons who we sell more to will always result in manufacturers going out of business and jobs being lost.

[TheBigDemo]

29. Keep the heat on: Dennis will be heard at the convention. n/t

[arewethereyet]

31. an alternate take

it is not possible to cancel NAFTA, the damage to the economy makes this a foolish thing to suggest.

They are, however, for revisiting these and finding a way to make them work for us insted of against us. A sensible approach.

[redqueen]

43. It is possible. Don't believe the scaremongering hype.

You can't 'revisit' these agreements. All changes must be agreed upon by all parties and ratified by the tribunals in the WTO.

The men who make up these tribunals are handpicked by representatives of multinational corporations.

[shivaji]

33. There is but only ONE way to raise standard of living

and that is by increasing productivity. We can't raise
everyone's standard of living by protecting all domestic jobs.
That is exactly what the Soviets tried. They guaranteed
every living soul a job. But the result was that their
rubles would'nt buy a damn thing.

If we are going to reatin the high standards of living in this
country, there is only one way.........we gotta produce products
which are better, cheaper and more innovative than any one else
can. To do that we need a highly educated and motivated work
force.

[mac2]

40. We raised our productivity to the highest in the world.

When we invent new ways to produce products cheaper, etc., companies such as Motorola and GE give them our technology. How fast can we go to keep up with what is being sold off?

GE just gave the Chinese our technology so they can build two new plants and manufacture the turbines in China. See the Wall Street Journal about this. This is not a new story. It is happening everyday, with companies closing and taking their secrets and technology out of the country.

My husband is a Automation Computer Engineer. He is in the business of making products faster, cheaper, etc. American engineers, computer experts, business managers, sales people, etc. have succeeded in making us very productive. Even this type of service is being sent off shore. No...it isn't better.

They sell us off pretty cheaply too. Only the CEO and salesman make a short term profit. The corporation's shareholders,employees, engineers, managers, etc., that built the company making it a success, don't see any returns. Fact is, they get laid off.

This is fraud and CEOs should go to jail for their self interests. It is theft.

Every Congress person should be upset about this. Seems, only a few try to stop it. Kucinich is one.

What you suggestion has already been done. We've done our part...the government and CEOs have not.

[mac2]

38. And health care, etc.

[mac2]

39. This is why Democrats are saying their party has abandoned

The workers. These trade deals have not benefited us. Fact is, they have plundered our resources,rewritten our laws, and might even mean the end of our democracy "as we knew it".

We have abandoned our base. Remember?