Obama abandons US economy ... for the Teamsters?
By Soren Dayton Posted in Archived | Barack Obama | Free Trade | Teamsters — Comments (3) / Email this page » / Leave a comment »
The Wall Street Journal trashes Barack Obama's abysmal trade rhetoric:
Here's one "change" presidential candidate Barack Obama apparently believes in: higher prices. Witness his letter last week urging President George W. Bush not to submit the U.S.-South Korea free-trade agreement to Congress for ratification.
Heritage notes that this would have an impact on trade by lowering the trade deficit by between $3b and $4.5b.:
The U.S. International Trade Commission has estimated it would increase annual U.S. exports to South Korea by between $10 billion and $11 billion, and increase imports from the longtime Asian ally by between $6.4 billion and $6.9 billion.
But Obama opposes it...:
On the record so far, Mr. Obama is the most protectionist U.S. presidential candidate in decades. In February he inserted a statement opposing the Korean trade deal into the Congressional record only days before securing the endorsement of the powerful Teamsters union.
This is the same union that he also wants to end federal oversight of, even though he knows they are corrupt.
How does that help American workers or the Teamsters members who would ship those goods?
...as it stands, there are noticeable barriers to sell American goods in South Korea, while Korean goods are already relatively barrier-free in terms of sale in the US. What McCain needs to do is point out that what Obama is doing is opposing not free trade, but the ability for American firms to sell goods overseas. Some strange "protection" going on there...
Of course, when was the last time facts got in the way between Barry O. and a feel-good populist swindle?
"Once within the maw of Leviathan, degree of digestion is irrelevant." - Michael Fisk
I'm a great believer in comparative advantage, free trade, etc.
But I recognize that free trade has just become radioactive among many voters (even among many Republican voters, from the latest polls).
The middle of a Presidential campaign is not the time to educate Americans on economics. This is not an issue on which McCain, or many other Republicans, can hope to run on right now. It's the kind of issue that can lose the entire Rust Belt to the Democrats, where free trade is (unfairly) blamed for the decline of America's industrial supremacy.
You have to win the election on things they do care about. And then, if you win, you can use the power of the office to devise more good trade deals that benefit America.
to support the ethanol boondoggle (which I think McCain should nail him on as frequently as possible and make sure to bring it up with facts at the first debate), so this isn't that far of a leap for him.