Edwards' Statement in Response to Hillary's Support of the Peru Trade Agreement

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.

"As I have said before, there are real and serious differences in this presidential race, and our stands on this trade deal are another example. Whereas voters in Iowa, New Hampshire and all across America have learned that I will fight for safe and smart trade, now they see that Senator Clinton, by supporting this trade deal, has chosen to follow a very different path.

"It's time for Senator Clinton to stand up for working Americans and stop defending corporate lobbyists and a broken system in Washington."
How You Can Take Action

http://johnedwards.com/news/press-releases/20071108-clinton-peru/

"For decades, our leaders in Washington have pursued trade policies that have devastated communities like the ones I grew up in. Take NAFTA – it was supported by insiders from both political parties, but it has cost us more than 1 million jobs. Now, at a time when American families are terribly concerned about job losses and a weak economy, our Congress is about to vote on expanding the NAFTA-free trade model to Peru.

"The Peru deal will continue the trade policies that have long failed our workers and cost American workers their jobs. It's time to show some guts and backbone, stand up and oppose this trade deal, and demand trade policies that put families and workers first. I urge members of Congress to vote against this deal today.

"The fact that the Peru trade deal is supported by a bipartisan group of insiders, including George Bush and senior officials from the first Clinton Administration – many of whom are now lobbyists, corporate lawyers, and business consultants – should be proof-positive of why members of Congress should join with me and oppose this deal. The benefit to corporate lobbyists from both sides of the political aisle will come only at the expense of hard-working families.

"Senator Obama has chosen to support this bad deal. I strongly disagree with his position, but at least he has taken one. Senator Clinton, on the other hand, has refused to take any position. I urge Senator Clinton to publicly announce, today, her opposition and join with me in encouraging members of Congress to vote against the Peru trade deal."

http://johnedwards.com/news/press-releases/20071107-peru-trade-deal-vote/

http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2007/11/08/clinton-says-yes-to-peru/

I think she came to the right position, even if it was a little late.

Read their statement, which is as balanced as you can get, on the House version of the bill. They do praise the Democrats leaders in the House who did a better job than in previous bills in putting in labor provisions. http://www.aflcio.org/mediacenter/prsptm/pr11082007b.cfm Senate Finance Chairman Baucus makes the same claim for the Senate bill that was approved by voice vote in committee (I don't know if this means the entire committee was for it.)

The thing to remember is that it is not trade agreements that drive globalization, but the disparity in costs and the fact that it is increasingly easier to do so. Not having trade agreements will not stop this. There are hearings on this on the Senate Finance Committee site. (I assume the House ones are on line too) This may not be as black or white as Edwards suggests.

That the AFL-CIO, which I would expect to be against a trade agreement is neutral is significant. What might be important in combination with this is that under their "actions" they are pushing another bill that expands a progam that helps Americans hurt by trade agreements.