Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search
 

SouthernDemLinda

(182 posts)
17. The problem for Clinton.....
Sun Jun 19, 2016, 07:06 PM
Jun 2016
http://www.ibtimes.com/hillary-clinton-trans-pacific-partnership-obama-aide-calls-her-out-tpp-past-1975980http://

Hillary Clinton And Trans-Pacific Partnership: Obama Aide Calls Her Out On TPP Past

BY CLARK MINDOCK
@CLARKMINDOCK
ON 06/19/15 AT 8:42 PM

Hillary Clinton has found herself in a tough place. Democrats have come together in a high-profile rejection of giving U.S. President Barack Obama broad trade negotiation authority on the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP), and it makes political sense that Clinton has more or less done the same in campaign rallies. The problem for Clinton, though, is that during her time as secretary of state, she may have expressed support for the deal more than a few times -- and at least one Obama administration aide has pointed out her involvement.

In an interview on Bloomberg TV Thursday, National Security Adviser Susan Rice said that negotiating the TPP was one of Clinton’s biggest achievements while at the State Department. Less than a week earlier in Iowa, Clinton said that the president should listen to his allies in Congress, such as House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, when approaching the deal. Pelosi has been a strong ally of Obama on just about everything throughout his presidency, but recently she opposed Obama and the so-called fast track authority for trade deals.

“As you know, we have been negotiating the Trans-Pacific Partnership agreement to bring that to fruition,” Rice said. “We look forward to receiving trade promotion authority from Congress. That is another significant accomplishment” of Clinton’s.

On Sunday in Des Moines, Clinton took a somewhat measured approach to the subject while saying Obama should heed his Democratic allies. She said she would be tough in similar negotiations if she were president and cited her vast experience voting on trade deals while a Senator from 2000 through 2008.

But, critics have pointed out that she’s held conflicting views on trade deals in the more than two decades she has been in the national public eye. At various points, she’s both supported and opposed trade reform.

As a candidate in 2008, she opposed the North American Free Trade Agreement, which she supported when her husband promoted it as president in the '90s. She then helped negotiate the TPP as secretary of state. After her tenure at the State Department, she went more or less silent on the topic until recently, when she seemed to reverse course, though in a noncommittal manner.

“What I have advised … is that the president take the opportunity offered by staunch allies like Nancy Pelosi … and try to figure out how to use this as leverage to go back to the other countries and say: ‘You want a lot out of this. I need more,’ ” Clinton told Radio Iowa this week.

The TPP negotiations are a part of the Obama administration’s so-called pivot to Asia. Early in his presidency, Obama outlined a plan to put more energy and focus into the Asian Pacific, especially in terms of economic development. While serving as Obama’s secretary of state, Clinton expressed support for the Trans-Pacific Partnership in at least 45 public speeches, according to a roundup of quotes by CNN.

“Now President Obama and I have said many times that this will be America’s Pacific century, and we are focused on the broader Pacific,” Clinton said in remarks on April 12, 2012, at the White House Conference on Connecting the Americas. “That’s why we’re creating the Trans-Pacific Partnership. We recognize the mutual benefits of engagement between the Americas and the rest of the Pacific.”

In April, Clinton’s staff said that she would still consider the trade deal under certain circumstances and hadn’t yet rejected it.

“Hillary Clinton believes that any new trade measure has to pass two tests,” Clinton’s spokesman, Nick Merrill, said in a statement to the New York Times. “First, it should put us in a position to protect American workers, raise wages and create more good jobs at home. Second, it must also strengthen our national security. We should be willing to walk away from any outcome that falls short of these tests.”

But while she seems to be publicly distancing herself from the president’s trade policy, her campaign has quietly partnered with a pro-TPP lobbying firm.

A majority of Americans oppose giving the president fast track authority to negotiate the trade deal, according to a New York Times/CBS poll. There’s at least one other reason that Clinton might be pushed farther away from supporting the TPP: her Democratic primary challenger Sen. Bernie Sanders, who opposes TPP fast track. He’s already criticized her for maintaining a lukewarm position, and he has surged to within 10 points of Clinton in New Hampshire.http://www.ibtimes.com/hillary-clinton-trans-pacific-partnership-obama-aide-calls-her-out-tpp-past-1975980]

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

Elizabeth Warren happened and Bernie hopped on MattP Jun 2016 #1
And this also.. Probably bounced the idea off each other. LiberalArkie Jun 2016 #3
The problem for Clinton..... SouthernDemLinda Jun 2016 #17
My link didn't come out SouthernDemLinda Jun 2016 #19
She was for TPP before she was against it dynamo99 Jun 2016 #30
not unheard of for someone to refuse an order from the President of the United States. SouthernDemLinda Jun 2016 #42
It's good that they both recognized that we should do this... scscholar Jun 2016 #27
Uhm. davidthegnome Jun 2016 #33
Listening to Brunch with Bernie kacekwl Jun 2016 #35
absolutely! senseandsensibility Jun 2016 #38
Bernie jumps on wagon ....while there are giant piles of shit everywhere else! SouthernDemLinda Jun 2016 #47
And Bill Clinton wanted people to invest it in the stockmarket Chasstev365 Jun 2016 #2
This message was self-deleted by its author progree Jun 2016 #6
Will we get a COLA increase this year? katmondoo Jun 2016 #4
No President can increase COLA on their own ... JoePhilly Jun 2016 #5
I was told no increase because gas 840high Jun 2016 #22
This is the real evil of COLA Scruffy1 Jun 2016 #43
One could see that as silently imposing a more drastic chained CPI..not less, nothingx2 stuffmatters Jun 2016 #7
The President doesn't establish the COLA, and he never "wanted to cut Social Security". George II Jun 2016 #9
You might want to check History beforre making such proclaimations. bvar22 Jun 2016 #20
Bill Clinton wanted to cut Social Security but then NorthCarolina Jun 2016 #8
+1 Bill and Newt in 1997 WH meetings to privatize, I mean 'reform' SS and Medicare. appalachiablue Jun 2016 #24
What a Free Republic comment. onehandle Jun 2016 #25
It's not a "comment", it's an article. It's not Free Republic, it's US News & World Report. NorthCarolina Jun 2016 #31
Not sure "wanted to cut" really properly captures Obama's outlook. cheapdate Jun 2016 #10
It doesn't, but this is the DU, where lying about Democrats is standard ConservativeDemocrat Jun 2016 #18
Uh huh. cheapdate Jun 2016 #23
Its true creeksneakers2 Jun 2016 #39
Simpson Bowles... tk2kewl Jun 2016 #26
The point of compromise is that no one gets everything they want ConservativeDemocrat Jun 2016 #28
Social Security is slowly running out or money because our Living-Wage-Jobs have been shipped -none Jun 2016 #34
Longer lifespans, ending of the demographic bubble... wage growth comes up last ConservativeDemocrat Jun 2016 #36
The lifespan for people at age of retirement has not increased by much. Scruffy1 Jun 2016 #44
Not to mention all the subsidiary benefits. seabeckind Jun 2016 #37
Finally some one who has the corect answer. Scruffy1 Jun 2016 #48
Tax Cuts for the rich cost more than the wars .... SouthernDemLinda Jun 2016 #49
Not to burst your bubble dflprincess Jun 2016 #32
The GOP was never going to agree to raise taxes on the rich creeksneakers2 Jun 2016 #40
No one cares about that. maindawg Jun 2016 #11
With property tax, all kids in a district get same access to public schools, and there's no cap stuffmatters Jun 2016 #14
I always thought property tax for education is a bad idea seabeckind Jun 2016 #41
That Damned Sanders - Getting In The Way Of Our Extraction scottie55 Jun 2016 #12
Oh, it is really just pandering campaign blather. On Obama's part. djean111 Jun 2016 #13
Simpson-Bowles never went anywhere. Obama campaigned on SS. joshcryer Jun 2016 #15
"As always..." Beartracks Jun 2016 #16
I remember signing the petitions. Duval Jun 2016 #21
Thank God for Bernie and Elizabeth nt zentrum Jun 2016 #29
Amen. Scruffy1 Jun 2016 #45
SO IMPORTANT! highprincipleswork Jun 2016 #46
Disability Insurance Fund will run out sometime this year OnlinePoker Jun 2016 #50
But, but, but Bernie never did anything in the senate! AllyCat Jun 2016 #51
LOCKING THREAD AS SOP VIOLATION LostOne4Ever Jun 2016 #52
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Obama Wanted to Cut Socia...»Reply #17