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

digg Share this on Facebook Huffpost - Did Hillary Clinton Really Support NAFTA? Aides, Biographers Say No stumble reddit del.ico.us RSS


First Posted: 02-14-08 01:13 PM   |   Updated: 03-28-08 02:45 AM

I Like ItI Don’t Like It
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?

Story continues below
advertisement

"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."

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, arg...
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, arg...
Report Corrections
 
Comments
216
Pending Comments
0
iPhone App Promo

Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to

View Comments:
Page: « First ‹ Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 Next › Last » (6 pages total)
- semorg I'm a Fan of semorg 6 fans permalink

She didn't exactly come out and speak against it! With her on the board of Walmart (who benefited from NAFTA) you wonder where she really stood. How come we didn't hear about her opposition sooner when her Husband passed it. Why doesn't she then make a big stance against it?

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 06:50 PM on 02/14/2008

Duh, when was she on the board of Wal-Mart and when was she First Lady and when did Nafta pass?

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 11:56 PM on 02/14/2008
- Lisette I'm a Fan of Lisette 37 fans permalink
photo

Hillary Clinton's big career move was being married to Bill. Other than that, there are no achievements anywhere and certainly her Senate years are unremarkable.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 06:36 PM on 02/14/2008

That's way off base. You sound like a Republican­....

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 09:16 PM on 02/14/2008

Even if what you said was true and it's not, but even so, she would still have multiple times more relevant experience to be President than Obama has.

Obama people should never be allowed to criticize Hillary's experience until someone demonstrates that Obama has done more that push yellow buttons in the Illinois legislature and spend all his time as an elected Senator running for President.

The amazing thing about his arrogance is that it is so audacious people can't believe it and give him the benefit of any doubt that there must be something there. Whatever is there, simply does not add up to anything that any responsible person would recognize as relevant experience for this job. I am sure there is no Fortune 500 company that would consider Obama for CEO. Well, maybe now that he's made such a big media sensation, but before this, no. And being a big media sensation does not qualify one to be President. However, the Republicans have so dumbed down the electorate with their rhetoric and policies and their ability to foist the totally unqualified Reagan and Bush Jr on the public, that today people appear to be ready to buy anything, so here comes Obama, the "left"'s attempt to one-up the Republicans.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 01:02 AM on 02/15/2008

You're so right.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 07:35 AM on 02/15/2008
- globality I'm a Fan of globality 16 fans permalink

Is she a supporter of NAFTA

depends on what your definition of is is.

What about the famous quote
"what is good for Walmart is good for the USA"

On another subject

Do you believe that her husband's pardon of a murdering (killed a cop in New York) Puerto Rican terrorist group will help or hurt her in the Puerto Rican primary

I assume it will help as it was originally done to help garner the Puerto Rican vote in NYC

check out
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bill_Clinton_pardons_controversy


or Google Clinton puerto rican terrorist

While you are at it Google
"Marc Rich pardon" AND TIME (magazine)

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 06:00 PM on 02/14/2008

I love it when Obama haters point out a couple of his blunders when Hillary and Bill Clinton have 30 years of mistakes that they have never answered or apologized for.But because the bar is set so low every time a republican is in office, all the clintonians will salute any half assed attempts at real improvement that the Clintons raise up the flag pole.

HILLARY VOTED FOR A WAR THAT HAS KILLED MANY PEOPLE AND SHE STILL HAS NOT APOLOGIZED FOR IT!
No matter what anybody says about Obamas past, nothing shows more bad judgement and disregard for human life then not being able to apologize for a war that has destroyed so many peoples lives.
HILLARY FAILED AT GETTING US UNIVERSAL HEALTHCARE!Then she accepted money from all the same corporations that stopped it.
HILLARY WANTS TO FIX OUR ECONOMY BUT SHE CANT EVEN HANDLE HER OWN CAMPAIGNS' ECONOMICS.­She had to lend herself 5 million dollars and now her supporters are paying off her debt.
Obama might not be perfect but he is a strong candidate with many good plans for this country and everyone knows he can beat John Mcain!
The Clintons have had their chance and FAILED!
The last 8 years with Bush should make that undeniable!

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 05:51 PM on 02/14/2008

What a moron

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 06:14 PM on 02/14/2008
- Lalo I'm a Fan of Lalo 2 fans permalink

Obama voted to keep the war going. He never voted against it, so don't fantasize about how he would have voted.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 06:34 PM on 02/14/2008
- loria I'm a Fan of loria 150 fans permalink
photo

He didn't vote to keep the war going. Obama has always been opposed to the war, but votes to support our troops. We can't just stop the war like that, we have to get ourselves out. In the meantime, we need to provide the troops with what they need to fight the war.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 08:11 PM on 02/14/2008
- NYC07 I'm a Fan of NYC07 61 fans permalink

Isn't it just obvious that Clinton's supporters who hate Obama for voting for funding for the soldiers, feel that it's the soldiers’ own fault that they’re in Iraq, and as such they get what they deserve because they can't get themselves home. The administration puts them in Iraq with the help of people like Hillary, then her supporters feel that they should not be given the very necessities to protect themselves.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 08:46 PM on 02/14/2008
- Roshi98 I'm a Fan of Roshi98 10 fans permalink
photo

Here are Obama's top economic advisors. Coincidentally, they all support NAFTA.

Austan Goolsbee: U. of Chicago neoclassicist and "Sicko" critic

David Cutler: Harvard economist who believes that high health costs are good for the economy

Jeffrey Liebman: another Harvard economist and former Clinton adviser who favors privatizing social security.

We can go tit-for-tat all night on whatever significance there might be with these partnerships, but it ultimately comes down to what the candidate plans to do.

Don't hope for the best, vote for the best!

Hillary '08

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 05:48 PM on 02/14/2008

Part 1 of 2:

http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,1584649,00.html

Hillary: "I Have to Earn Every Vote"

Thursday, Feb. 01, 2007

By KAREN TUMULTY/WASHINGTON

"TIME: Do you think NAFTA [the North American Free Trade Agreement, signed by Bill Clinton] was the right thing to do?

CLINTON: I think NAFTA was, in principle, a good idea to try to create a better trading market between Canada and the United States and Mexico. But I think the terms that it contained, and how it was negotiated under the Bush Administration and the failure to have any tough enforcement mechanism, like pollution on our border with Mexico, for example—"

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 05:47 PM on 02/14/2008

Part 2:

CLINTON: But it was inherited. NAFTA was inherited by the Clinton Administration. I believe in the general principles it represented, 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. You look at the trade enforcement record between the Clinton Administration and the Bush Administration, the Clinton Administration brought more trade enforcement actions in one year than the Bush Administration brought in six years.

For me, trade is who we are. We're traders. We want to be involved in the global economy, but not be played for suckers.

As we look at trade today, I don't think we can look at trade separate and apart from how we fix health care. I don't think we can look at it separate and apart from how we incentivize and pay for education, so we keep trying to improve the skills of our workforce. And I think that the budget deficit has mortgaged our future and the holders of the mortgages are governments like the government of China, so then it makes it even more difficult for us to get tough when it comes to trade. So we've kind of walked into this vicious cycle and we need to break it.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 05:48 PM on 02/14/2008

During the 1992 Presidential Debates, George Bush was for NAFTA. Ross Perot was against NAFTA. And Bill Clinton was for it, but wanted to make it better with some changes, as I remember.

The Congress was controlled by Democrats back then during the NAFTA vote and it would seem to me a veto would have held up politically speaking, with little chance of an over ride.

NAFTA was signed, not vetoed.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 06:01 PM on 02/14/2008

You've been Triangulat­ed.... Sucker

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 05:46 PM on 02/14/2008

Bullshit on this noise Mrs. co-president.

If you were against NAFTA, you should have done something about it - maybe you could have gone on TV and cried. But that fact that you didn't even whimper shows that you supported it until it became political trouble.

No more lies. No more clintons

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 05:41 PM on 02/14/2008
- savertime I'm a Fan of savertime 4 fans permalink

Bill Clinton PUSHED NAFTA through with Hillary's support and help. I hate revisionists.

If Hillary wants to run on her husband's presidency, the perceived success of the 90s,
her experience as first lady, then she should have to answer for the policies of Bill's administration. She, of course, had such a big role!!

What about the tax cut to the wealth?
Banking deregulations?

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 06:06 PM on 02/14/2008
- dtd I'm a Fan of dtd 8 fans permalink

She says she knows how to reach across the aisle to persuade Republican legislators to support universal health care, but couldn't get her HUSBAND to scrap NAFTA???

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 06:36 PM on 02/14/2008

From what I could gather here.....i­f NAFTA wan't on the table.....­Bill Clinton never would have been President. It looks like the Republicans couldn't pass it on their own....so they worked behind the scenes to put Clinton in.....who promised to pressure the Democrats to vote for it. Ross Perot must have seen through this sharade but couldn't convey the messege to enough of the public.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 07:41 PM on 02/14/2008

Please Sam. No facts. They interfer with the drone of "yes we can" from the Obamatrons. Why should we be subjected to reality and when we have "hope"?

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 05:40 PM on 02/14/2008
- pinkerman2 I'm a Fan of pinkerman2 5 fans permalink

apresdeluge You should be subjected to a dose of common sense together with an injection of faith in the American people. Ask the jobless in Ohio and Michigan. Nafta was a Clinton deal all the way. Yeah, I hate revisionist's too.

YES WE CAN!

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 08:16 PM on 02/14/2008
- Dari I'm a Fan of Dari 15 fans permalink
photo

excerpt from Bloomberg.com on HRC and NAFTA:
Full Story:
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601070&sid=atUKcP4eSEvY&refer=politics

...Clinton­'s positioning on trade reflects the changing nature of the debate in the U.S., which increasingly focuses on concerns over outsourcing and the shift of jobs to other nations such as China and India rather than on the benefits of tariff reductions.

Grassroots Sentiment

...Both parties agree that a backlash on trade helped Democrats in the 2006 elections. West Virginia Senator Jay Rockefeller, a Democrat, said U.S. workers have been ``so decimated'' by unfettered competition that ``I think the American people understand they will be hit by it.''

Clinton promoted her husband's trade agenda for years, and friends say that she's a free-trader at heart. ``The simple fact is, nations with free-market systems do better,'' she said in a 1997 speech to the Corporate Council on Africa. ``Look around the globe: Those nations which have lowered trade barriers are prospering more than those that have not.''

Praise for Nafta

At the 1998 World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland, she praised corporations for mounting ``a very effective business effort in the U.S. on behalf of Nafta.'' She added: ``It is certainly clear that we have not by any means finished the job that has begun.''

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

There was little evidence of a protectionist tilt to Clinton's trade views during either her 2000 campaign or first years in the Senate. She stressed issues such as homeland security and children's health care, and wasn't a major voice in trade-policy debates.

As she began to gear up for a White House run, Clinton became less of a free-trade booster and more skeptical about the payoff of globalization.

Another FLIP FLOP????

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 05:33 PM on 02/14/2008
- Roshi98 I'm a Fan of Roshi98 10 fans permalink
photo

How is this a flip flop? Please explain.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 05:50 PM on 02/14/2008
- Dari I'm a Fan of Dari 15 fans permalink
photo

Roshi:

While HRC was "First Lady" - part of her 35 years of experience, she was ALL for NAFTA.

Please read the full article from Bloomberg in March 2007.

Now, that we are in the Presidential primaries,
Senator Clinton's position has changed dramatically (considering part of her constituency is "blue collar" workers)..­.

For me, that constitutes a FLIP FLOP.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 05:58 PM on 02/14/2008
- LAJonathan I'm a Fan of LAJonathan 3 fans permalink

Check out the preview for the new movie featuring Hillary Clinton. www.hillarythemovie.com

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 05:29 PM on 02/14/2008
- Roshi98 I'm a Fan of Roshi98 10 fans permalink
photo

Check out FactCheck.org DEBUNKING "Hillary: The Movie."

http://www.factcheck.org/elections-2008/crooked_claims_about_clinton.html

Quote:

The video reminds us of various "documentaries" that proliferated in the early years of Bill Clinton's presidency. "The Mena Coverup," "The Clinton Chronicles" and others accused Clinton of a range of illegal and unethical acts. Like many – we daresay most – of those, this video contains a lot of false, unproven and misleading material. And what it leaves out is often more important than what it tells us.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 05:36 PM on 02/14/2008

The flip side is, of course that there may be some truth in it.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 01:11 AM on 02/15/2008

Quoting President Clinton, Sept. 14, 1993 in signing the NAFTA Agreements, “I believe that NAFTA will create 200,000 American jobs in the first two years of its effect. I believe if you look at the trends -- and President Bush and I were talking about it this morning -- starting about the time he was elected president, over one-third of our economic growth, and in some years over one-half of our net new jobs came directly from exports. And on average, those export-related jobs paid much higher than jobs that had no connection to exports. I believe that NAFTA will create a million jobs in the first five years of its impact. And I believe that that is many more jobs than will be lost, as inevitably some will be as always happens when you open up the mix to a new range of competition”.
Remember those famous words and red flags by Ross Perot regarding NAFTA, “NAFTA will cause a giant sucking sound as jobs go south”. Guess ‘ol Ross was right.
When Ohio, Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, etc. vote in the upcoming Dem primaries, I hope they are introspective about how things are going in their States regarding the Clinton trade plan, and the subsequent loss of millions of formerly good, quality US jobs and the formerly strong manufacturing base exiting their States and the country.
Don’t believe that NAFTA has had a detrimental affect on US jobs and manufacturing? The US Census Bureau past statistics for US trade “deficits” (i.e. more foreign imports than US exports) in billions $, goods not seasonally adjusted, was approximately:
1992- 85,'93-115­,'94-151,'­95-159,'96­-170,'97-1­80,'98-230­,'99-329, 2000-436, 2001-412, 2002-468, 2003-532, 2004-650, 2005-767, 2006-817, 2007- 730
How’s it going for the people of Ohio, Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, Michigan, etc. these days regarding good jobs? NAFTA wasn’t part of that HRC “35 years of experience”?
IMO Sen. Obama is the one offering a true change in direction.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 05:22 PM on 02/14/2008
- dgscol I'm a Fan of dgscol 4 fans permalink
photo

They are lying liars. Weren't they impeached once for this?

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 05:11 PM on 02/14/2008
- clbrune I'm a Fan of clbrune 2 fans permalink

No, the First Lady was never impeached. (Duh?)

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 06:53 PM on 02/14/2008
photo

"... 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."

What Hillary is saying is: "I was for NAFTA, before I was against it."

(She sounds like John Kerry.)

Why can't she ever just admit she was wrong? Because she doesn't think it's wrong. (not the war or NAFTA, CAFTA, or anything that favors corporate America at the expense of the people.)

She's never run a primary campaign this whole time because she honestly thought that she would be handed the nomination. So she ran a general election strategy from the start: a triangulated dog and pony show meant to win a couple of big business votes and pay then pay them off when she got elected.

It's a ruse!

Hillary thinks Democrats are sheep. (and listening to some of her supporters you get the idea that maybe she was partially right) America is tired of having it's jobs boxed up and shipped to China, only to have our dollars shrunk so we can't even afford to buy their junk.

Look at her healthcare! MANDATES? Who really benefits from that? She even defended healthcare lobbyists at the Daily Kos convention in defiance of almost everybody there.

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0807/5251.html

But the worst part of Hillary's candidacy is she's just trying to be a more competent Bush. She's offering a lot of his positions, but just saying she could do it better. She's still never said that going into Iraq was wrong. She's only said she'd have voted differently on the AUMF, not that the mind-set that took us to that decision was wrong. NOT once.

America doesn't want a more efficient George Bush, we want something COMPLETELY DIFFERENT.

Obama in '08

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 05:10 PM on 02/14/2008

so when you say she sounds like John Kerry, are we talking about the same John Kerry who endorsed the current leader of the obamatrons? That John Kerry? The one who should be President, but couldn't figure out how to actually win an election? That John Kerry? Yeah, I'm sure you guys have answers to all these questions, don't you?

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 05:56 PM on 02/14/2008
- cakelady I'm a Fan of cakelady 3 fans permalink

After reading some of these comments I wonder if these people even read the article. They are certainly putting a different spin on things. I think that Obama has become the teflon man who nothing he does wrong sticks to. He was wrong in his commercial against Hillary and I think that his team did so knowing they were wrong. Besides, people she is running for president, not her husband. If you read correctly she was not allowed to speak her mind on the subject. Much like when you are in the service and they can say nothing against their commander in chief. Some people refuse to listen to the truth and twist what they read to suit themselves. Too bad! I think that is the reason this country has found itself in such a mess. We turn a deaf ear to what we do not want to hear. I wonder, can someone tell me one accomplishment that Obama has had in his service to country? If he goes against McCain who has had many years of service to country, he will show how little he has accomplished. He needs more years in the senate or as a vp to Hillary. The only thing I keep hearing is that he will bring us all together. What exactlly does that mean? We had Bush would was to be the uniter not a divider. All it is in the end is a word. We need more than that if you are to run a country. If he wins the nomination, hope he picks someone who has experience to help him, but please Lord, not someone like Cheney! That would be another disaster!

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 06:36 PM on 02/14/2008
- nikto I'm a Fan of nikto 18 fans permalink
photo

Yup, NAFTA was a good idea.

And so is cutting out your liver with a butter knife and serving it to your
neighbor's rottweiler.

Well golly-gee aw-shucks, Batman, is NAFTA really Bad policy?

Well...
only if drinking a gallon of Clorox is
bad for your health.

But according to famous "Conservative Logic", it might actually be good for you!

Like NCLB, NAFTA is toxic, Evil, deceptive, larcenous and it must be done away with!!

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 05:10 PM on 02/14/2008
Page: « First ‹ Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 Next › Last » (6 pages total)
Comments are closed for this entry

 You must be logged in to comment. Log in  or connect with 

Connect