Protectionist Stance Is Gaining Clout

[one...two...tree 2,762]

By GREG HITT

DUBUQUE, Iowa -- Bidding for a congressional seat held by a free-trade Republican for nearly two decades, Democrat Bruce Braley has gained an edge by taking the opposite view: bashing globalization.

In one of the most closely watched congressional races, Mr. Braley has made opposition to the Bush administration's free-trade agenda a centerpiece of his campaign. He has run ads blaming the state's job losses on President Bush's "unfair trade deals." He has urged more focus on labor rights in national trade policy and talked of using economic sanctions to keep America competitive. "Our workers aren't on a level playing field," he says.

Mr. Braley's stance has helped propel the 49-year-old lawyer, who is running against an unabashedly free-trade Republican, into position to reverse recent trends and secure a Democratic win in Iowa's First District. His strong showing not only underscores how trade concerns have emerged as a central issue in many of this year's races but also suggests a more-protectionist U.S. trade policy if Democrats take Congress.

Even if Democrats don't win control, the campaign rhetoric may have a lasting effect, because some Republicans are finding it more painful politically to defend free trade.

The trend is worrying the business community. Top financial-services executives identified "protectionism" as the biggest threat to continued economic growth, after terrorism, according to a recent Financial Services Forum survey. The U.S. Chamber of Commerce is spending about $10 million nationwide in the final days of the campaign to rally supporters for candidates sympathetic to business priorities, including free trade.

http://online.wsj.com/public/article/SB116...mod=tff_article

[Saddle Bronc 124]

Only find that both pubs and dems all-too-willing to push or bash free-trade at convenience.

Canada-US Free Trade Agreement was almost unanimously pushed through Congress and Senate in 1988. NAFTA (amendment to C-US FTA) was pushed through by CLINTON.

[one...two...tree 2,762]

Only find that both pubs and dems all-too-willing to push or bash free-trade at convenience.

Canada-US Free Trade Agreement was almost unanimously pushed through Congress and Senate in 1988. NAFTA (amendment to C-US FTA) was pushed through by CLINTON.

I think many bought into the idea that the provisions within NAFTA would ensure fair trade. Now, after a decade, the results of NAFTA are clear and enough politicians are willing to rethink about our current trade policies.

[Nikita2Charles 33]

Specially when it comes to outsourcing, there's no balance for the american workers. Gobalization is not a bad thing totally assuming the playing field are level. Now a recent graduate is not just competing against his classmate, neighboors, countryman but against others from China, Malaysia, India, Singapore, for the same Job.

2Choices- 1) Bring them here on H1 Visa with LOW PAY, they will accept it with the opportunity to get the green card after a couple of years.

Worse

The company bring them on BUSINESS VISA, they are getting paid foreign currency while they work here in the USA> not a joke

3) Bring them back to their countries to work according to that country Low cost of living.

So now a kid in NY is at a TOTAL disadvantage to a kid in Malaysia, India or Singapore.

OUR TAX $$$ is helping the other countries to build their Infrastructure so they can Take American Jobs because of Cheaper Labor

Guess what's interesting

It's OUR TAX DOLLARS at work.

Can anybody tell me what make sense to SPEND OUR TAX $$$ as TAX BREAK for companies doing outsourcing, meanding Our tax money is being spend to SHIP JOB OVERSEAS.

So the next generation, my kid will have to go to ASIA to work for a living.

[AnaAndDaniel 0]

it is a new way of life folks. we have to figure out how to compete.

i don't have the answers, but I do not think that closing up our nation (isolationists ideas inserteed here) will work.

Daniel

:energetic:

[one...two...tree 2,762]

it is a new way of life folks. we have to figure out how to compete.

i don't have the answers, but I do not think that closing up our nation (isolationists ideas inserteed here) will work.

Daniel

:energetic:

I agree Daniel. We need open trade but it has to fair as NikitaT2Charles above points out.

Edited November 7, 2006 by Steven_and_Jinky