EDITION: U.S.
 
CONNECT    

Did Hillary Clinton Really Support NAFTA? Aides, Biographers Say No

First Posted: 3/28/08 Updated: 5/25/11

Hillary Nafta

As the 2008 campaign shifts to economically hard-hit states like Ohio, so too do the topics of political debate. This week, Sen. Barack Obama's campaign has attacked Sen. Hillary Clinton on trade, arguing that she was once a supporter of the North American Free Trade Agreement that contributed to the loss hundreds of thousands of American jobs.

"A little more than a year ago," an Obama mailer reads, "Hillary Clinton thought NAFTA was a 'boon' to the economy." The piece goes on to argue that the New York Senator is "changing her tune" now that she's campaigning in the Buckeye State.

The attack is, most observers say, misleading. The "boon" line, a paraphrase lifted from a September 2006 Newsday article, has yet to be confirmed as an authentic quote. But, more importantly, the mailer misrepresents what former Clinton administration officials and biographers say was Hillary Clinton's long-held opposition to the legislation.

"In August in 92, we had to make a decision," Mickey Kantor the former U.S. Secretary of Commerce, Clinton adviser, and free trade advocate recalled for the Huffington Post. "President Clinton had to make a decision as governor, whether or not he would support [George H.W. Bush's] NAFTA, and of course he did... Hillary Clinton was one of the great skeptics in the discussion as to whether he should do. So she was always skeptical beginning in 1992 and onward."

Indeed, as Kantor went on to note, Hillary Clinton long held reservations over the labor and environmental fallouts of the free trade agreement. In addition, she was, at the time, eager to see her health care reform (not NAFTA) pushed through Congress. As such, Clinton biographer Sally Bedell Smith writes in her book "For Love of Politics," her disapproval of the trade agreement was both political and philosophical.

The economic team and other key advisors, including Mack McLarty, Mickey Kantor, and David Gergen, were likewise urging Bill to use his momentum to push or congressional ratification of the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA)...Liberal Democrats, including Hillary, opposed it primarily because it could take jobs away from American workers. But as an advocate of global economic cooperation, Bill was drawn to its free-trade philosophy.

It fell to Mickey Kantor, the U.S. Trade Representative responsible for implementing NAFTA, to reason with Hillary. One day in August, he sat her down on a bench behind the White House and tried to strike a compromise. "I said, 'If you want to drop NAFTA, we can kill it, but we shouldn't,'" Kantor recalled. "I said, 'The way to do it is to introduce health care, spend a month on it, and then do NAFTA, then go back to health care.'" With misgivings, Hillary acquiesced to the proposed sequence.

Carl Bernstein, another Clinton biographer, echoed much the same tale during a recent appearance on CNN.

"'Bill,'" he recalled Hillary Clinton as saying, "'you are doing Republican economics when you are doing NAFTA.' She was against NAFTA. And if she would somehow come out and tell the real story of what she fought for in the White House and failed in a big argument with her husband she would end up moving much closer to those [John] Edwards followers."

So why didn't we hear such protests from Hillary Clinton during her husband's administration?

"The whole time that she was first lady," said Robert Shapiro, the undersecretary of commerce during the Clinton White House years, "she, like everybody else...[was] not supposed to deviate from the position of the administration. There is no freedom of speech in there, and that certainly applies to a first lady."

On the 2008 campaign trail, Clinton has been free of those shackles. And, on many occasions, she has expressed misgivings about NAFTA, although usually she qualifies her statements by saying she supports the underlying idea.

"I believe in the general principles it represented," she said last February, noting that she voted against CAFTA [the Central American Free Trade Agreement] because of a lack of environmental and labor standards. "But what we have learned is that we have to drive a tougher bargain. Our market is the market that everybody wants to be in. We should quit giving it away so willy-nilly. I believe we need tougher enforcement of the trade agreements we already have."

Clinton ``is committed to free trade and to the growing role of the international economy,'' Steven Rattner, a Clinton fundraiser and co-founder of Quadrangle Group LLC, a New York buyout firm told Bloomberg.com. ``She would absolutely do the right thing as president.''

More recently, at the Las Vegas Democratic Debate on November 15, 2007, she offered the following, more concise declaration: "NAFTA was a mistake to the extent that it did not deliver on what we had hoped it would."

FOLLOW HUFFPOST POLITICS

 
  • Comments
  • 216
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2 3 4 5  Next ›  Last »  (6 total)
11:03 AM on 02/25/2008
So why didn't we hear such protests from Hillary Clinton during her husband's administra­tion?

"The whole time that she was first lady," said Robert Shapiro, the undersecre­tary of commerce during the Clinton White House years, "she, like everybody else...[wa­s] not supposed to deviate from the position of the administra­tion. There is no freedom of speech in there, and that certainly applies to a first lady."

Regardless of the excuse she buckled and sold out, so what makes us think it will be any different if she's President?
12:53 AM on 02/24/2008
This story is worthless and sloppy. Relying on Clinton's aides to confirm something Clinton claims? Why don't you just reprint one of her press releases? Next.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
01:07 PM on 02/15/2008
Obama has voted to EXPAND NAFTA into Peru. Now he speaks of Americans ignoring South America. I don't see how he can call Clinton on it. Obama possess a "say/do" conflict typical of Republican­s. I won't vote for him.
12:25 PM on 02/15/2008
Oh, Please....­. It was a co-Preside­ncy right? That's why she is ready on day one. Nafta passed on Clintons watch, Bill and Hillary's. This is more BS revisionis­t history from the Clinton camp.
10:00 PM on 02/16/2008
Based upon what evidence do you make such a silly assertion? And, please be specific with sites to your credible informatio­n. Thank you.
11:48 AM on 02/15/2008
Hillary has solutions but, they seem to turn into failures, requiring new solutions.

AUMF, NAFTA, Predatory lending bill, Patriot Act, Bankruptcy bill, Kyle/Liebe­rman resolution­.
09:13 AM on 02/15/2008
I'd just like to point out that Huffpost highlighte­d this story that favors Sen. Clinton and suggests Sen. Obama is not entirely truthful. There's no question Ariana is pro-Obama but at least the site is able to show a little balance in this regard.
photo
Nutcase
Of, By and For - Elsewhere known as Psycho MD
11:50 AM on 02/15/2008
Will there be a second instance?

cognito ergo populistae
10:02 PM on 02/16/2008
Not likely. The corporate media has already coronated Obama, just like they did Bush those many years ago.
08:26 AM on 02/15/2008
""NAFTA was a mistake to the extent that it did not deliver on what we had hoped it would."

Hillary's words about NAFTA sound very similar to her rationaliz­ation about voting to authorize Bush to invade Iraq in 2002... just more Clinton calculatio­n, triangulat­ion and strangulat­ion!
08:11 AM on 02/15/2008
oops, previous post to the wrong site
08:10 AM on 02/15/2008
a muslim ‎is an adherent of the religion of Islam.

barak obama is a christian, he has attended the same church for approximat­ely 20 years.

where do you get your misinforma­tion?
10:24 PM on 02/16/2008
You're right, he does attend a "Christian­" church, which is based upon black values, black leaders, and supports such people as Louis Farrakhan, who received their lifetime achievemen­t award last November.

http://www­.tucc.org/­about.htm

Yes, the same Louis Farrakhan who calls white people "blue-eyed devils," the "Anti-Chri­st," his "mortal enemy," and states that white people are not yet human. The same Farrakhan who calls Jews "bloodsuck­ers," and their religion a "gutter religion." Obama has said that he doesn't subscribe to the racist views of Farrakhan, but he still attends the church, and still considers their Pastor, Rev. Wright, whose name is on the award given to Farrakhan, as his mentor and spiritual advisor. According to Rev. Wright, white America's bigotry is to blame not only for whatever ills continue to plague the black community, but also for our country's conflicts with other nations. After 9/11, he said, "In the 21st century, white America got a wake-up call after 9/11. White America and the western world came to realize that people of color had not gone away, faded into the woodwork or just disappeare­d as the Great White West kept on its merry way of ignoring black concerns." I wasn't aware that only white people suffered on 9/11 or that it was a wake-up call to white people. Is it really a "Christian­" belief to attribute most of the worlds ills to one race; do you think Jesus would blame "white people" for most of the worlds problems (or any other race, for that matter); or, do you think Jesus might not base his opinion on the color of one's skin, but rather on the content of their character (to quote Dr. King). I do not believe that Jesus is a racist, therefore, I am sure that the later is true.
08:07 AM on 02/15/2008
ah, yes. as co-preside­nt, this is part of her 35 years of experience­, she most assuredly helped her husband come to the conclusion that nafta was a go.
07:58 AM on 02/15/2008
David Sirota says yes, many people say yes actually..

http://www­.huffingto­npost.com/­david-siro­ta/hillary­-clinton-p­retends-_b­_86747.htm­l
09:45 AM on 02/15/2008
I think Sirota has the REAL unCLINTONI­ZED history and not the Clinton's REDACTED versions. When you can put support of NAFTA dierctly in her mouth... well, I know she'll find it hard to swallow...­.
07:36 AM on 02/15/2008
hillary the corporate whore was behind NAFTA all the way.
photo
Nutcase
Of, By and For - Elsewhere known as Psycho MD
11:59 AM on 02/15/2008
Oh, I see you're one of those who supports Obama's claims of wanting to unify the party. Actually, they are both corporate whores.

cognito ergo populistae
03:11 AM on 02/15/2008
This was posted on Huffinton Post today.

"Hillary Clinton has made statements unequivoca­lly trumpeting NAFTA as the greatest thing since sliced bread. The Buffalo News reports that back in 1998, Clinton attended the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerlan­d, and thanked praised corporatio­ns for mounting "a very effective business effort in the U.S. on behalf of NAFTA." Yes, you read that right: She traveled to Davos to thank corporate interests for their campaign ramming NAFTA through Congress.

On November 1, 1996, United Press Internatio­nal reported that on a trip to Brownsvill­e, Texas, Clinton "touted the president'­s support for the North American Free Trade Agreement, saying it would reap widespread benefits in the region."

The Associated Press followed up the next day noting that Hillary Clinton touted the fact that "the president would continue to support economic growth in South Texas through initiative­s such as the North American Free Trade Agreement.­"

In her memoir, Clinton wrote, "Senator Dole was genuinely interested in health care reform but wanted to run for president in 1996. He couldn't hand incumbent Bill Clinton any more legislativ­e victories, particular­ly after Bill's successes on the budget, the Brady bill and NAFTA."

Yes, we are all expected to just forget that, so that Hillary Clinton's campaign can manufactur­e supposed "outrage" that anyone would say she supported NAFTA - all at a time her chief strategist­, Mark Penn, simultaneo­usly heads a firm that is right now pushing to expand NAFTA into South America.

What a total insult to America's intelligen­ce."
07:21 AM on 02/15/2008
Excellent research job.
01:38 AM on 02/15/2008
I guess I missed something. NAFTA is like creationis­m. It just poofed into existance.

If she doesn't support it she can pull the US out of it with a six month notice when she becomes prez. Hold your breath everyone.
12:30 AM on 02/15/2008
Virtually all of Obama's criticisms of Hillary are simply recycled talking points from her critics of the right and left that Obama thinks he can just toss her way as if they were proven facts.

This is the arrogance of Obama: trying to capitalize on Republican attacks on "fellow" Democrats. This is why Obama is dividing the party.
HUFFPOST COMMUNITY MODERATOR
Thad
02:43 AM on 02/15/2008
Yes. Because sponsoring a flag-burni­ng amendment and supporting Bush's saber-ratt­ling against Iran isn't divisive at ALL.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
kjg25171
12:04 PM on 02/16/2008
I am not a Clinton supporter, yet I think you should know your facts. She did not support an amendment. A law is not an amendment.
09:05 AM on 02/15/2008
What does it matter if a talking point is recycled as long is it as true?

As an example, hillary is a corporate whore. If I rephrase that to a 'hooker for big business' it doesn't change the fact that the clintons put their wallets and their egos ahead of the interest of the American people.

The clintons took tens of millions of dollars in donations which they solicited from the Arabs and then tried to push the sale of the control and security of American shipping ports to the UAE.

Does it matter if a Republican says this first? No - of course not. The elemental fact remains the same - the clintons tried to fatten their wallets at the expense of the safety of American citizens.

So to say that Obama repeats Republican talking points is - well, just dumb.
11:52 AM on 02/15/2008
Who is the corporate whore now? When Obama uses lobbyist money to pay off Superdeleg­ates, is that his idea of "putting his wallet behind the interest of the American people?"

Harper's Magazine

http://www­.harpers.o­rg/archive­/2006/11/0­081275

"Williams subsequent­ly set up a conference call between Obama and a group of financial-­industry lobbyists. That, too, went well, and in June of 2004, Williams helped organize "a little fund-raise­r" for Obama at The Bond Market Associatio­n."

"He has taken in an additional $3.8 million for the Hopefund, his leadership PAC."

Now follow along:

http://www­.capitaley­e.org/insi­de.asp?ID=­336

"Obama, who narrowly leads in the count of pledged, "non-super­" delegates, has doled out more than $694,000 to superdeleg­ates from his political action committee, Hope Fund, or campaign committee since 2005. Of the 81 elected officials who had announced as of Feb. 12 that their superdeleg­ate votes would go to the Illinois senator, 34, or 40 percent of this group, have received campaign contributi­ons from him in the 2006 or 2008 election cycles, totaling $228,000."

Straight from the lobbyists to the Superdeleg­ates. Obama really does want to change things huh?

Yes SHE Can