Edwards' Track Record on Trade Has Lane Changes

[Freddie Stubbs]

He has supported some accords and opposed others during his five years in the Senate.

By Nick Anderson, Times Staff Writer


WASHINGTON — With rising fervor, Sen. John Edwards has focused on the North American Free Trade Agreement to fuel his pursuit of Sen. John F. Kerry, stressing that the Democratic presidential front-runner supported the accord with Canada and Mexico while he opposed it.

But Edwards, a senator from North Carolina, has a far more nuanced record on international trade than his rhetoric would suggest, supporting some trade initiatives and opposing others during his five years in office.

Edwards hopes to keep up the pressure on Kerry and the trade issue as the campaign battleground shifts to industrial states like Ohio, which holds its primary March 2. There and elsewhere, NAFTA is a dirty word for many Democrats who blame it for job losses.

News accounts corroborate Edwards' assertion that he went public with his opposition to the accord during his successful initial run for the Senate in 1998 — five years after NAFTA won congressional approval.

more: http://www.latimes.com/news/politics/la-na-edwards19feb19,1,5982334.story

[AP]

1. Dan Schorr described it this way months ago: Edwards votes against

NAFTA when it's bad for jobs, which is why the DLC doesn't like him, he said.

[Ninga]

2. Lane changes are a part of driving down the hightway

of politics. It's OK, if you take new or different positions. It's not flip flopping it's learning new information that takes you to a different lane.

[AP]

5. He was always driving to same destination: protect American workers.

[flpoljunkie]

6. Far more US jobs have been lost due to China trade deal than NAFTA.

In fact, many American jobs that went to Mexico have now been lost to China.

http://www.lasvegassun.com/sunbin/stories/bw-elect/2004/feb/18/021808033.html

He frequently talks about his opposition to the North American Free Trade Agreement, which Kerry supported, suggesting it has cost many U.S. jobs. Edwards wasn't in the Senate when NAFTA was passed in 1993.

And he rarely mentions a trade-liberalization measure he did vote for, as did Kerry - a 2000 measure giving China elevated trade status. Far more U.S. jobs have been lost to China and other Asian nations than to Mexico or Canada, the countries covered by NAFTA, economists suggest.

[AP]

7. Proof? Anyway, China isn't even abiding by the deal. It's hard to blame

a deal that China is breaking every day.

[flpoljunkie]

8. Read the addendum to my post.

[maddezmom]

3. interesting article

<<Nor has Edwards filled the Congressional Record with anti-NAFTA speeches since he took office in 1999. Lawmakers often give speeches for the Congressional Record, or insert them in writing, on topics near to their heart.>>

How many times has Edwards spoken out against NAFTA since becoming a Senator and before his run for President? Don't know the answer, just wondering.

[krkaufman]

10. Actions louder than words, in 1998 and now.

Also from the LA Times article...

There is little evidence that he made NAFTA a major issue in his 1998 campaign — in part, an Edwards aide said, because the Republican incumbent at the time also opposed the accord.

Nor has Edwards filled the Congressional Record with anti-NAFTA speeches since he took office in 1999. Lawmakers often give speeches for the Congressional Record, or insert them in writing, on topics near to their heart.

In his first major congressional vote on trade, Edwards voted for a controversial trade accord with China in September 2000 that was bitterly opposed by organized labor.

And, as another poster has pointed out, the China pact has made NAFTA moot in many ways, superceding it and sending jobs in Mexico to China.

Actions speak louder than campaign-trail words, both in '98 and now.

[Cocoa]

4. "more nuanced than his rhetoric"

That's exactly what I think about Edwards.

Deborah Norville asked Elizabeth Edwards what the biggest difference between Edwards and Kerry was, Elizabeth said trade. She said Kerry was a "free-trader." Norville pointed out that Edwards supported the China law and others, and when Elizabeth explained, she gave all the free-trader explanations.

i.e. it seems to me Edwards is as much of a free-trader as Kerry.

The thing I like about Kerry, and that I liked about Gephardt, is that they don't take the nuance out of their rhetoric, they don't dumb it down. It hurts them, because people see them as being boring, but I think it's more honest.

[Freddie Stubbs]

9. It hasn't hurt Kerry yet

Unless you consider having over 50% of the delegates awarded so far as a failure.

[Adelante]

11. Possibly of interest

Kerry
1st place finishes — 15
2nd place finishes — 1
3rd place finishes — 1
4th place finishes — 0


Edwards
1st place finishes — 1
2nd place finishes — 6
3rd place finishes — 3
4th place finishes — 7

# of states where Kerry has received 10% or less: 0
# of states where Edwards has received 10% or less: 6


# of states where Kerry has beaten Edwards: 15
# of states where Edwards has beaten Kerry: 2

Average Kerry vote share: 45%
Average Edwards vote share: 19%
Average Dean vote share: 15%


Average Kerry margin over Edwards: 26 points
Average Kerry margin over Edwards 2/7-2/17: 31 points


Source: ABCNEWS, The Note, 2/19/04

http://abcnews.go.com/sections/politics/TheNote/TheNote.html

[jpgpenn]

12. more of Edwards overinflating

The man must seriously think he is still in a closed off court room, as if his past record and talking points wont somehow be made available.

Scarey, when you think of how an ego can so carry a person!