Obama: Trade & Immigration Linked

Date: October 27th, 2007

Situation: Presidential Candidates Forum in Person – Rural Youth Summit – Ames, IA

Question: Senator Obama was asked about the changing face of rural America and what he would do to reform immigration laws so as to respect the contributions of immigrants and keep immigrant families together.

Answer: Senator Obama responded that he backed comprehensive immigration reform – the standard talking points – secure border, path to citizenship, new applicants at the end of the line – but also that people are coming to this country because agribusiness is pushing people off the land in other countries, and that we need to stand up to them as well.

Question: Trade agreements like NAFTA have hurt family farmers. What is your stance on further trade agreements?

Answer: Senator Obama responded that he wants to include strong labor and environmental standards in any new agreement, and that he would amend any past trade deals to include strong provisions. He also stated that he would revisit the NAFTA Chapter on Agriculture, which has been devastating for family farmers and caused millions of peasant farmers off the land in Mexico and the reason for influx of immigrants. He said the same principles would have to apply to any new agreements, like the several now pending, and that he would not initiate new agreements that did not include those standards and bring affected parties to the negotiating table.

Richardson Criteria on Trade

Date: Sunday, October 21^st, 2007.

Situation: Public Question at Richardson event at Keene State College in Keene, NH

Questions: Richardson was asked about investor state provisions, the Peru trade deal, zoning of the amazon for oil and reference his views on energy.

Check out this video, a total time of 3 minutes

 

His response in a nutshull: He state states he doesn’t support Peru Deal NAFTA and his support of NAFTA was a mistake. He lists what we need in trade deals, asks for clarification on investor state provisions
States that those provisions are not progressive

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0tsVztwFyAo

Dodd Uses Trade Arguments, Doesn’t Commit on New Pacts

Date: October 23rd, 2007

Situation: Several Public Questions – Town Hall in VFW Hall 9127 in Des Moines, IA

Question: Senator Dodd asked about views of NAFTA and CAFTA, and if he would support future Trade Agreements.

Answer: Senator Dodd admitted voting for NAFTA but said he learned his lesson and opposed CAFTA. He said that as President he will never sign a trade bill that doesn’t benefit working people and referred to the Maytag plant closure as an example. He went on to say that CAFTA allowed nations to set their own labor and environmental standards and that this caused a ‘race to the bottom.’ He attacked China for poor product safety, currency manipulation, and ’slave labor.’ He did not take a concrete stance whether or not he’d vote for the pending trade deals.

Other Questions: a) Senator Dodd was asked about the deterioration of the family and referenced the economy, plant closures and offshoring as elements that stress families via the economic hardship of layoffs and poor wages. He said unions needed to be a big part of the answer, and b) when asked about corporate welfare, when US states and even communities auction off the commons for the sake of luring or retaining jobs, Dodd responded as though it were a trade question, then revised. He stated that this is what the race to the bottom is, only at home. He was willing to explore ways to address that without interfering with local control of policy.

Biden: No New NAFTAs

Date: October 19, 2007

Situation: Polk Co. (IA) Democrats Fall Harvest & Auction – Handshake Line

Question: Sen. Biden was asked if he would commit to oppose Bush’s new trade agreements.

Answer: He replied that he was not in favor of trade the way we’ve been doing it, that we need to have enforceable labor and environmental standards in any trade deal. He said that’s he’s a good friend of labor and knows how bad trade as currently practiced has been for working people. However, he said, any candidate who tells you they’re going to bring back the steel industry is lying you.

Follow Up: So you are going to support Bush’s expansions of unfair trade rules to Colombia, Korea…?

Answer: No, I’m not. I’m going to vote against those new NAFTAs and against the Peru & Panama deals too. They’re not good enough and the American people, and the American worker deserve better.

Obama: Peru is a Compromise

Date: 10/12/07

Situation: Public Question at Town Hall Mtg. – Newton, IA

Question: Would Obama revisit his stance on Peru trade deal, noting that we do want a new way on trade, but that the AFL-CIO and no other allied groups felt the provisions of the deal are sufficient to merit support.

Answer: He responded that he had not voted yet, that this deal was not like NAFTA, that the AFL CIO was split, not opposed to the deal; that standards in Peru weren’t written by corporate lackeys, but by the ILO, that 90% imports from Peru already enter duty free, thats it’s a tiny economy, and, perhaps most interestingly, that he was going to vote for this deal so he could oppose the worse deals, and that once he was prez, he would support only good deals.

Follow Up, Handshake Line: Obama said that some people want to stop trade altogether (implying this applied to those lobbying against Peru FTA) and that its complicated. I told him that we do want trade, but that these deals were written by corporate interests who are overjoyed to have been able to placate us with ’standards’ , that standards are dubious to begin with but nonetheless insufficient to claim that the resluts of such a deal won’t be a net loss for real people in both countries.

He said that Rangel negotiated it, and Pelosi, and that they wouldn’t put weak deals together, that they knew that the Dems need to be able to be for trade and econ growth. I told him that the incentive to offshore still is greater with such a deal, that real people still lose and that democracy is still subverted b/c much of the text of the deal is about enshrining corporate rights etc.

We agreed to disagree and that we could supply more info to his staff.

Richardson to Renegotiate Some Parts of NAFTA

Date: 10/7/07

Situation: Handshake Line – Johnson Co. (IA) Dems Fall BBQ

Question: Gov. Richardson was asked if he would renegotiate NAFTA.

Answer: Richardson stated that he would go back to insert the labor and environmental standards in the text of the agreements, but did not commit to further changes.

Dodd “Very Skeptical”, Not Yet Committed

Date:   10/7/07

Situation:    Handshake Line – Johnson Co. (IA) Dems Fall BBQ

Question:    Dodd asked whether or not he was on record for or against Peru trade deal.

Answer:    Sen. Dodd stated he was “very skeptical of any new trade deals negotiated by this administration”.

Follow-Up & Answer:    When question was posed again about the specifics of the Peru deal, Sen. Dodd repeated that he was “extremely skeptical” but would not go on record at that time.

Obama: Yes on Peru & Panama, Says Its Fair Trade

Date: 10/3/07

Situation: IFTC volunteer’s Public Question during Town Hall Mtg. on Foreign Policy – Washington County Fairgrounds – Washington, IA

Question: NAFTA & CAFTA have failed for the US and for Latin America. Corporate trade policies have taken good jobs overseas, kept wages low and forced Latin American workers from their homes and into exploitative working conditions. New standards inserted into new NAFTA expansions will do nothing to change this situation.

Will you support Bush’s new NAFTA expansions to Peru and Panama despite this awful track record?

Answer: Sen. Obama stated he wasn’t fond of NAFTA or CAFTA, but “doesn’t believe we can isolate our selves from the world.” He said was was in favor of Fair Trade policy and that he opposed Bush’s Korea NAFTA expansion, because it was unfair to US auto exports.

He said that he thinks we need to pass the Peru and Panama deals because they will benefit American workers (and added that he would work with the Mexican government to help them develop jobs for their citizens in their country!)

Dodd: Let’s Get Tough on Tainted Imports; Undecided on NAFTA Expansion

Date: 9/15/07

Situation: Public Question – Town Hall meeting with Ankeny Area Democrats; Ankeny, IA

Question: Would he commit to opposing Bush’s NAFTA expansions to Peru and Panama.

Answer: Said Dodd administration will make it clear that we must trade, allow won’t ‘allow’ new deals without high standards, won’t let jobs get shifted to where people get paid and treated poorly. Said Dodd deals won’t be investor rights deals. He discussed no-trade related solutions for job loss (education & new energy economy-biofuels). He mentioned that we should have blocked Mattel imports and sad we didn’t, and lambasted lead paint and tainted food supplies. Never specifically mentioned new NAFTA expansions.

Thompson: Yes to Trade Pacts AND Border Security

Date: 9/8/07

Situation: Handshake line – Seacost Republican Women’s annual ChiliFest in Stratham, NH.

Question: Will you continue to support free trade although most studies show it as part of the root this wave of immigration, and even tough the brave men and women of the border patrol say as long as people are driven from their homes, no security scheme can stop them?

Answer: “I don’t agree with your premise. I think we simply lack the will to secure the border. I don’t believe we have to sacrifice free trade for border security.