[CTC] White House throws base & Clinton under bus

[Arthur Stamoulis]

Two articles below…


POLITICO
Obama admonishes his base on trade

By Sarah Wheaton 

4/23/15 6:38 PM EDT
President Barack Obama told progressives on Thursday to stop fighting a trade deal with Asia “on reflex alone” because the economy has changed, but he hasn’t.

At a Washington gathering of Organizing for Action — the reincarnation of the presidential campaign that fought for “change we can believe in” — Obama took his own base to task for its resistance to his next big policy initiative.

“You don’t make change through slogans,” he told about 200 activists at the Ritz-Carlton in Georgetown. “You don’t make change through ignoring realities.”

While Republicans have backed "fast-tracking" a 12-nation Pacific trade agreement, it’s Democrats who have balked, with liberal voices like Sen. Elizabeth Warren warning that the deal would fuel outsourcing and lost wages. But Obama countered that America would be shut out of the new economy if it did not take the lead on writing new trade rules.

Obama noted those “saying this trade deal would destroy the American working family, despite the fact that I’ve done everything in my power to make sure that working families are empowered.”

“By this logic I would’ve had to do all his stuff for the last six and a half years and just say suddenly I want to just destroy all of this,” he continued, punctuating his remarks with a snap.

Obama said the deal he is negotiating would be “the most progressive trade agreement in history,” citing enforceable provisions to protect workers and the environment.

“America has got to write the rules of the global economy,” Obama said, later adding, “We want to make sure we win the future.”

The president said opposition stems from misinformation about this agreement or lingering dissatisfaction with a trade deal “that was passed 25 years ago.”

But feeling embittered by NAFTA is all the more reason to back this deal, Obama said, noting that it would fix problems with the Bill Clinton-era agreement because Canada and Mexico would also be signatories.

Opposition to a new deal “means you’re satisfied with the status quo,” he added. “The status quo isn’t working for our workers.”

To view online:
http://politi.co/1GnEWLj <http://politi.co/1GnEWLj>
=======

POLITICO
White House on trade deal: Clinton is with us

By Edward-Isaac Dovere and Annie Karni 

4/23/15 8:13 PM EDT
Hillary Clinton hasn’t said whether she supports President Barack Obama’s 12-nation Pacific trade deal, but the White House thinks the answer is pretty clear.

“I haven’t seen anything to suggest any distance,” White House principal deputy press secretary Eric Schultz told reporters traveling with Obama to the Everglades on Wednesday.

Asked if the White House considers Clinton an ally on trade, Schultz said yes — the day after the president declared liberal icon Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) “wrong” on opposing his desire for “fast-track” authority to negotiate the Pacific deal.

“I believe that the labor, environmental and human rights concerns that many Democrats have voiced, the president takes to heart,” Schultz said. “And he would not sign a deal unless those protections are in place.”

All Clinton’s said on the matter is that “any trade deal has to produce jobs and raise wages and increase prosperity and protect our security” — and her campaign still won’t say whether she supports what Obama’s seeking, or what specifically she would want to see it changed.

“We have to do our part in making sure we have the capabilities and skills to be competitive,” Clinton said.

The debate over the trade deal has divided the Democratic Party, with the majority of congressional Democrats moving against Obama’s position. Many have been trying to get a clearer sense of Clinton’s position than the very noncommittal one she sketched out earlier this week in New Hampshire <http://www.politico.com/story/2015/04/hillary-clinton-trade-deal-conditions-trans-pacific-partnership-117189.html>.

They haven’t had much luck. When House Democrats gathered for a meeting with top Clinton campaign staffers at the home of Rep. Rosa DeLauro (D-Conn.), one of the leading opponents of a trade deal, campaign chairman John Podesta was pressed for an answer and essentially recited Clinton’s statement.

Both because of how controversial Obama’s proposal is among Democrats and its percolation just after Clinton’s launch, the trade issue presents potential clash of priorities between a president who’s determined to remain an active force in the national political conversation and a candidate who is struggling with how to run as a quasi-incumbent.

“If you were watching MSNBC and all this stuff, you’re thinking, ‘Man, I love Obama, but what’s going on?’” Obama said Thursday, trying to convince skeptical members of his own Organizing for Action. “We’ve got to do whatever we can to help our workers compete — and it’s not a left or right issue, it’s not a business or labor issue … It’s an issue about the past, and the future.”

The opposition to the Pacific trade deal, Obama said, is still fighting NAFTA — whereas he’s pushing a deal that has enough labor and environmental protections in it that he calls it the most progressive trade deal in history.

“You need to tell me what’s wrong with this trade agreement, not one that was passed 25 years ago,” Obama said. “When people say this trade deal is bad for working families, they don’t know what they’re talking about.”

The trade debate won’t be the last time Clinton is asked to take a position on Obama’s proposals, and though the White House aides say they accept that she’ll have to stake out some differences, they’re also not eager for Clinton to undercut them politically on one of the president’s top priorities.

Back in 2012, she called the Trans-Pacific Partnership “the gold standard,” which former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush said in a Wednesday post on Medium <https://medium.com/@JebBush/hillary-clinton-s-politically-motivated-flip-flop-on-tpp-is-wrong-ab8f7d0afc12> made for a “conveniently timed” switch.

Bush, who supports the trade deal, wrote “I haven’t changed in my view even though Hillary Clinton has. It is time to move forward as even recent Democratic presidents have recognized — and Secretary Clinton shouldn’t stand in the way for political gain.”

The unions fighting Obama on trade were hoping for much more from Clinton. AFL-CIO President Richard Trumka told POLITICO last month that Clinton coming out forcefully against the fast-track authority Obama wants would “put some wind in her sails” with organized labor that is still furious at her husband for NAFTA and had flirted with urging Warren to challenge Clinton in the primaries.

Former Maryland Gov. Martin O’Malley, who’s trying to find oxygen for his candidacy on Clinton’s left, is against the trade deal, as he and his aides have eagerly pointed out.

When asked by POLITICO Wednesday where Clinton would differ from Obama on trade policy, and what she would do differently from what Obama is proposing, Clinton spokesman Nick Merrill did not respond directly to the question.

“She has laid out the bar that needs to be met, to protect American workers, raise wages, and create more good jobs at home,” he said. “While this is being negotiated she will be watching closely to see what is being done to crack down on currency manipulation, improve labor rights, protect the environment and health, promote transparency, and open new opportunities for our small businesses to export overseas.”

Merrill said he didn’t have anything more to add on her position. He also did not respond to a question asking whether Clinton thinks members of Congress should support the president’s trade proposals.

Obama’s got a lot of convincing to do. Thursday, he’ll use his speech to the Washington summit for Organizing for Action, the group formed out of his own presidential campaigns, to try getting them to see his trade plans as progressive.


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.citizenstrade.org/pipermail/ctcfield-citizenstrade.org/attachments/20150423/7bdffdbe/attachment.htm>