Weeks of October 8th & 15th: Hillary Clinton calls for a reassessment of NAFTA and all other trade agreement every five years. See more at:
www.ft.com/cms/s/0/5606f40a-75f1-11dc-b7cb-0000779fd2ac.html?nclick_check=1
Barack Obama reconfirms his stance on Bush administration’s new bilateral trade deals, but leaves open the chance that he’ll change his min (see our post “Obama: Peru is a Compromise).
Also, the Republicans held debate about the economy in Michigan. As you can guess, there was plenty of talk about trade. Most frontrunners are in favor of NAFTA & WTO-style trade. See exactly who said what at:
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601103&sid=agRmZXThKeAA&refer=us
Week of October 1st: Barack Obama declares in public that he will vote YES on Bush’s Peru and Panama NAFTA expansions. This represents a change from previous statements by Sen. Obama that he was leaning toward favoring the NAFTA expansions soon to be before Congress.
Also, the NY Sun reported this week there is discord among the Clinton’s on the legacy of NAFTA. The article also highlights NAFTA critiques by the Edwards camp. See the article at http://www.nysun.com/article/63659
Citizen.typepad.com/eyesontrade has more great news on trade.
Week of September 22: Little change. No candidate is yet on record for a new model of Fair Trade, and all are either in favor of new Bush NAFTA expansions to Peru and Panama, or not solidly against them.
Notable exceptions are Kucinich (D-OH) and Paul (R-TX), who have held these stances for some time.
Check: citizen.typepad.com/eyesontrade for this week’s news media coverage of the candidates on trade.
