Obama’s NAFTA Shuffle-Step
February 28th, 2008 by POLIMOM
One of the more disturbing moments in Tuesday night’s debate was when Tim Russert pinned the candidates down on NAFTA — specifically, on holding the “opt-out” hammer over the heads of Canada and Mexico to renegotiate terms.
Here’s the “button-up” from Russert to Clinton:
MR. RUSSERT: But let me button this up. Absent the change that you’re suggesting, you are willing to opt out of NAFTA in six months?
SEN. CLINTON: I’m confident that as president, when I say we will opt out unless we renegotiate, we will be able to renegotiate.
And here’s Obama:
SEN. OBAMA: I will make sure that we renegotiate, in the same way that Senator Clinton talked about. And I think actually Senator Clinton’s answer on this one is right. I think we should use the hammer of a potential opt-out as leverage to ensure that we actually get labor and environmental standards that are enforced. And that is not what has been happening so far.
As an Obama supporter, I have to admit that I’m disappointed he followed Sen. Clinton down this road.
Maintaining that little bit of daylight in between them on the NAFTA question would have been fine with me — not because I think the agreement is perfect, but because Sen. Obama’s previous statements on this issue were far more responsible to US interests as a whole.
What happened to the Barack Obama who could agree that parts of the economy have seen enormous gains? Or who said that he believed in free markets and capitalism?
The answer is that Ohio happened.
This is worrisome. Although I fully expected some level of placation and pander to labor as the campaigns went deeply into Ohio, this recent plunge into full-throated populism looks like one shuffle-step too far to the left… and if this report is correct, then Obama clearly knows that.
Looking beyond the domestic aspects of the problematic pander, do either of the Democratic candidates see what signal this is sending to the world?
Threatening to renege on a permanent treaty — as Clinton and Obama are doing through their identical vows to “opt out” of the deal — signals loudly that America’s word is no longer its bond. A permanent pact with the U.S., it turns out, isn’t so permanent.
An approach like that toward our treaty partners sends a chilling signal to our friends. It’s Obama and Clinton who need to cool it.
In this heated battle for their party’s nomination, both senators are playing with fire, but I’m far more concerned about how this impacts Obama than Clinton. I want him to win the nomination, but I also want him to win the general election… and this won’t help him.
He’s going to alienate more than just our treaty partners; he’s risking great swaths of ordinary Americans as well. Senator Obama needs to step away from the edge, before he falls off entirely.
Someone needs to remind him that the campaign doesn’t end in Ohio.
This entry was posted on Thursday, February 28th, 2008 at 6:54 am and is filed under Independents, Newsweek Blogitics, Ohio, Democratic Party, Barack Obama, Democrats, Hillary Clinton, 2008 Elections. Both comments and pings are currently closed.
