Clinton Says Yes to Peru Deal

Updated | 7:40 p.m.
Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton, after prodding from a rival campaign, has issued positions on several trade deals currently before Congress, including her support for an agreement with Peru that is dividing her party.

A trade pact with the South American nation passed the House today with primarily Republican support—a minority of the Democrats who voted did so in favor of the measure.

The free trade issue is also dividing Democrats on the campaign trail. Saying he was “disappointed” by its passage, John Edwards criticized Senator Barack Obama for expressing support for the bill, and he repeated his call—first issued on Sunday—for Mrs. Clinton state her position.

Here’s the answer, though not the one he wanted (or, at least, not the one he said he wanted):

I have long said that we need smart trade policies that advance labor rights, the environment, and our economic standing in the world.

I support the trade agreement with Peru. It has very strong labor and environmental protections. This agreement makes meaningful progress on advancing workers’ rights, and also levels the playing field for American workers. Most Peruvian goods already enter the U.S. duty free, but our exports to Peru have been subject to tariffs.

However, I will oppose the pending trade agreements with South Korea, Colombia, and Panama. The South Korean agreement does not create a level playing field for American carmakers. I am very concerned about the history of violence against trade unionists in Colombia. And as long as the head of Panama’s National Assembly is a fugitive from justice in America, I cannot support that agreement. Accordingly, I will oppose the trade agreements with these countries.

We need to vigorously enforce our trade agreements. As President, I will appoint a trade enforcement officer and double the enforcement staff at the office of the United States Trade Representative. I will also systematically review every trade agreement to ensure that it is delivering benefits to American workers. I will also expand the Trade Adjustment Assistance program so that workers negatively affected by the global economy get the help they need. And as President, in my first months in office, I will take a time out from new trade deals to assess their impact before going forward.

Update: Mr. Edwards quickly issued a missive against Mrs. Clinton, tying her support for the Peru pact to another one of his major lines of attack against her — that she is too close to lobbyists:

I am terribly disappointed by Senator Clinton’s support for the Peru trade deal. At a time when millions of Americans are concerned about losing their jobs and the economy, it is dismaying that Senator Clinton would side with corporations, their lobbyists, and the Bush Administration in support of a flawed trade deal that expands the NAFTA model.

Comments are no longer being accepted.

She cannot lead on this or any other issue, she wait for poll to tell her what is popular before she take her position. Obama have already taken the same position weeks ago why did it take her this long, remains a mystery. Even Edward come out weeks ago against it…but i wont be surprise to hear that she was for it before she become against it…We need a leader not a follower in White house…Obama is currently serving as a leader on this and many other issues.

Emmy,
Just because your candidate has a knee jerk yes or no position on complicated issues, does not mean every other candidate should follow similar lead. Most of these issues are more complicated than simple yes or no answers, and I think she did the right thing by thinking it over, going through the deal, and only then endorsing it. A simple black and white perspective on problems in the world or domestic affairs is not always a right thing and I guess we all have learnt that by seeing GW’s presidency, where everything was all clear yes and no.

Hey Chris, ever notice how every time HRC takes a position on these “complicated” issues, it’s in support of the corporate status quo. Her vote to authorize force in Iraq, her vote re the Iran revolutionary guard, her constant support of free trade(which just screws poor Americans to benefit American corporations), and on and on.
Let’s just say the truth: the System is corrupt and needs radical changes, and HRC is not going to be the agent of that far reaching change. HRC is not a leader on global warming, not a leader on repealing the Bush tax cuts, not a leader on cleaning up government, not a leader on ANYTHING that benefits anything except the system.
She is very much part of the problem, and is not part of the answer.

Edwards is having severe indigestion on this one. Maybe he should chew on it for a while until it is easier to swallow.

Why do Obamans always claim he is first on everything, when he never even shows up to affirm his positions?

In truth, there is very little difference on their positions, so it is expected that they will concur on many issues. At least Hillary takes her time to study each bill, and then actually shows up to affix or not affix her signature.

As some old sage once said, “You cannot dream yourself into a character; you have to hammer and forge yourself one.”

#4
“At least Hillary takes her time to study each bill, and then actually shows up to affix or not affix her signature”.
Since you are so well informed on Senator Clinton, your expertise is needed to explain why she didn’t take her time to read the NIE before casting her vote on the single most important foreign policy decision that this country has made since four decades.

A thoughtful response from Clinton. Even if you disagree with her position on this specific bill (have you read it?), it’s nice to have a thoughtful response rather than the rabid, polarizing demagoguery that’s devouring the Edwards campaign.

This is not to comment on the presidential candidates. It is to comment on trade with Peru. Good, bad or ugly, the world is now one of global economy. In the past the trade basically was east/west. Now, partly due to NAFTA and GATT, but also something that was inevitable, we find the shift in trade to north/south. US citizens now compete in the world not just the US for jobs. One can blame corporations, lobbys, government, your mother, but the fact is with the advances in travel and communications the world has changed. People all over the world now can compare their life with the US and they want better. Can you blame them??? If we want the USA to be safe and secure, the best way is to make the rest of the world economically sound, where there are educated, healthy people who like where they are and don’t need to come here to have a chance to make a difference in their existance. I have been to Peru. It is a striking country with much potential. A good relationship with such a vital country in South America will go along way for our security as well as set a positive example for other countries both in the Americas and the world. Good relationships between the US and the countries of South America are sadly lacking. When asked in Peru where I was from I started to say “America”. Every citizen of both the North and South American continents are Americans are they not? We must wake up to the fact that the USA is not the center of the universe. We are all parts of the whole. When you hold a marshmallow down in hot chocolate it will pop up around the spoon. People with desire will put in the effort to make changes. We can help them make positive changes and build respect and friendship or we can suppress the desire and the effort to fuel anger, hatred and create enemies.

It seems that Congress is way out of touch with the American people. Our retail markets are being flooded with goods from all over the world. Trade can be very beneficial to both countries. However, the products we are getting from these countries don’t meet the standards that we as Americans have come to expect. The toys with lead paint from China is just a tip of the iceberg. Have you bought any clothes made in one of these countries lately? All the sizes seem to be irregular. I bought shirts at Sears a few weeks ago. I didn’t try them on. I wear an extra large. The shirts were too small. I took them back and exchanged them for XX large. I washed them one time. They are now too small again. I can’t wear them, and I can’t take them back. For the prices I paid, these shirts could have been made to order in this country at a fair profit.

I am tired of Edwards criticizing anything Hillary says. I swear it will back fire – and his poll numbers remain the same.He is also looking more and more negative before he even opens his mouth !

It is a shame – I used to like him a lot and his wife Elizabeth, too.

A little considered side to the outsourcing conundrum.

My job can hardly be outsourced as it involves source based technical decision making, however, I noticed today that job listings for my position now say “applicant MUST read and write Mandarin”.

I wonder if Rosetta Stone has noticed an uptick on their Chinese language software.

Thank you Hillary and Kung Heh Fat Choi.

Poll or no poll at least i respect Obama and Edward for taking their position based on principals not political calculus…or on poll…we need a leader who will tell us what we need to hear not what we want to hear…personally, Clinton is not that candidate…and i respect her supporters for defending her. But using poll numbers to discredit all legitimate policy differences that are been raised by her opponents will surely backfire on her, she better answer these question before she is defined as wont answer, and say anything to blur the line candidate…Obama is answering the question and Edward is doing so too but Clinton will not answer any question you asked…this will surely lead to her downfall…

Tom,

Do you really think the Iran Revolutionary Guard is not a terrorist organization? Do you think that Peruvians who stand to benefit from a truly free trade policy and are part of the global community agree with you? The poorest of the poor actually benefit from free trade arrangements. The system is stuck that pretends otherwise.

Wake up to a new world.

I am having a great deal of difficulty with these trade agreements. We must protect our manufacturing base, if not, re-establishing that sector to it’s former global stature. If not that, at least, here in our own country with our own goods. It’s our economy, genius, not our consumption. Look at our trade deficits and that should answer some questions!!
SUPPORT OUR TROOPS, BRING THEM HOME, ALIVE. NOW.

Hillary is a Republican, just like her husband.
I think the middleclass will vote for her because they have proven they are stupid. They voted for their own demise with Bill Clinton and with George Bush.With all the good jobs leaving the country, how will we ever pay off the 9 trillion dollar debt?

Ah, Leticia AND Maya–what a relief to find that the entire Hail Hillary chorus has not fallen silent in while I was off shore.

Where do I begin?

Maya’s report on the state of John Edward’s digestive system?

Or Leticia’s assertion that poor Hillary can’t open her mouth and say so much as “I think the cookies are done” without the evil doer Edwards jumping down her throat?

Or–heck–I know this will strike some as radical–maybe I’ll stay on topic–to wit–the trade “deal” with Peru.

Call me cynical, but my reading of the trade “deals” to date–in the post NAFTA era–is that they have been long on benefits for big corporations (a.k.a. the folks who are pouring money into Ms. Clinton’s “centrist” campaign) and woefully lacking in terms of any sort of safeguards for workers’ rights and the environment–on either side of the agteement.

As for the merits of this specific agreement–I’ll admit I haven’t really studied it.

Though really, folks, what exactly is it that we’re getting from Peru? Or hoping to export there?

Last time I checked, it was grapes and flake.

Has that changed?

Or is that why Sir Hillary is in favor of opening the gates?

Can you Obama supporters not simply comment on the issue at hand and offer your reasons for supporting or not supporting it, instead of singing Senator Obama’s praises and listing all of Senator Clinton’s supposed flaws? You sound like a bunch of little kids saying “my daddy’s bigger than your daddy.” And this constant braying about Senator Clinton’s soon-to-be downfall gets a bit tiresome, too. To hear you tell it, every issue is a portent of Clinton’s downfall and Obama’s winning of the election. Isn’t that a bit of a reach?

Just to let you know, I was really hoping that I could just sit back, open the laptop, take a beer, and read the Edward and Clinton supporters bash each other.
I mean, this blog is now their time to shine and tear each other apart.

I mean, there is no need to involve Obama here, because he already stated his support of the Peru Trade initiative at a Q&A session in NH, citing the work of Pelosi and Rangel to get the Labor legislations in it and it passed muster with Levin.
Plus, as a member of the Foreign Relations committee and a keynote speaker at the Brookings Institution’s Hamilton Project, I can believe that he has an idea of what he is doing in supporting this, where it would benefit America Economically and Foreign relation-wise with South America.

There is no need for any mention of Obama to be in this blog because Edwards lightly criticized Obama – probably afraid that Obama could probably counter him better than Hillary, since Hillary did a “up-to-the-last-minute” cribing session on the legislation before voting for it.

I mean, this should be a fight between supporters for a guy who is out of touch with how our government can benefit the American People and the World, and a woman too scared to take a position for fear of legitimate criticism.
Let them have go at it!

To “Ned” at post #17:

Ah, the welcome home is complete!

How is life in law enforcement?

Reading your post–and Maya’s and Leticia’s–I am reminded of the Inspector’s line in Casablanca:

“Round up all the usual suspects.”

Really friend–may I call you friend–the topic here isn’t who is bashing here–I think–but the merits of the Peruvian trade deal–or trade deals in general–or may the candidates’ positions on trade deals.

This is to lyn and others like her/him
Just how have the “middleclass” proven they are “stupid”? That’s easy to say. Prove it.
If you define the middleclass as those who voted for Bill Clinton and George Bush you are not talking about the same people.
And your comment about “all the good jobs leaving the country” makes me ask, what do you define as “all the good jobs”?
I’m in business for myself with not a good job but a great one-and it is showing no signs whatsoever of “leaving the country”.
It sounds to me as though you are trying to compare apples with oranges and making no sense at all. But here’s one you may understand. Trying to make sense of your comments with your lack of being willing to back up your accusations with facts is like trying to nail jello to a wall.

Does anyone here really think that this agreement will have as much influence on the economy as, let’s say, the housing market, the president’s third world war announcement, the oil price, China buying Euro instead of Dollars, the national debt – shall I go on?
Let’s face it, there’s not much good ahead. The Peru deal is, well, peanuts?

Obama again shows his inexperience. Instead of coming up with a detailed and well informed speech about the issue like Hillary did, Obama just follows the crowd. Obama is not a leader, he is a follower.

Ned, but posts #1, 5, 10, 11, 17 (possibly more) are Obama’s supporters. Your post would make more sense if Obama’s supporters didn’t hijack every blog with pro-Obama and anti-Hillary rants.

First, I will be happy if Hill&Bill, Obama, or Edwards becomes president. Which I hope you Obama and Edwards supporters — certainly the most vitriolic — bear in mind after one of them, probably Hillary, wins the nomination. It would be a crime against humanity if our differences on “Free” Trade or any other issue allowed President Mitt or Guliani to be unleashed on the world after 8 years of Bush and Darth Vader. Really people, stop acting like the Right Wing Nuts and keep the discussion reasonable and non-personal. (Actually, since they are seemingly sacrificing idealism to the prize of retaining the WH by supporting Guliani, perhaps you SHOULD act like them…!)

Second, the world economy has changed and will continue to change and “Free” trade is here to stay. You don’t get everything in life. What we need is to get as much as we can out of these agreements and Hillary and Obama on the Peru deal are playing Real Politiks, the kind that actually changes the world — one small step at a time.

Go Hillary –Once again, you have made a carefully balanced and considered decision. You prove your competence every day and THAT is why you have my vote.

The last thing this country needs is another ideologue from the right or the left. I want a pragmatic centrist who can get things done — not someone who is going to be all bunched up in liberal or conservative dogma. Hillary leans to left of center but doesn’t fall into dogmatic purity and that’s good enough for me — just right in fact. I trust her and can’t wait to replace the boob in office today with her in Jan 09.

She has great values – thoughtfulness, intelligence, competence, consensus, action, solutions and yes compromise and THAT IS EXACTLY WHAT THE FOUNDERS CONTEMPLATED IN THE OFFICE OF PRESIDENT. It’s easy for legislators to hang onto their left wing/right wing dogma but a President needs to represent and stand for all of us – they have to lead and make things happen. THOSE ARE VALUES WORTHY OF A PRESIDENT AND HILLARY HAS THEM IN SPADES — BETTER THAN ANY OTHER CANDIDATE FROM EITHER PARTY. Go Hillary

This entry makes it seem at a glance as if Hillary Clinton invented free trade with Peru, or at least as if it’s happening on her authority.

It makes me hope that Obama gets some credit on this blog for his Social Security plan.

At this rate Hillary Clinton will say something about Social Security a week from now, after being pressured publicly to provide her insight on the issue. Then the headline will be hers, and somewhere in the middle it will mention Barack Obama in one sentence, as the originator of the plan.

He’s out there making speeches on the issues, and the videos of his speeches, and a lot of other materials on his policy, are on the Obama campaign site, easily found.

Check out all the candidates–their campaign web sites all have issues sections. Go in knowing what you believe about things that matter to you, and see who you think has the best ideas. That’s how this election, the candidates won’t fool us about who they are for about the 36th time running.

Of course, that many elections back about 80% of eligible voters participated, so we have a ways to go before we’re that politically engaged again.