Jim Johnson, NAFTA, and Barack's Short List for Vice President

Almost four years ago when I was writing a profile for Chicago magazine of Bill Daley (see this)--brother of the mayor of Chicago, lead lobbyist for NAFTA in the first Clinton term, commerce secretary in the second, chairman of the Al Gore campaign in 2000, and, with his brother, Mayor Rich Daley, an early backer of Obama--I interviewed one of Bill Daley's two best friends, James A. "Jim" Johnson. Johnson is in the news today because he is vetting vice presidential possibilities for Barack Obama, as he did for John Kerry in 2004 and for Walter Mondale 20 years before. (He also served as chairman of Mondale's campaign.)

Johnson seems universally well liked and respected, and he struck me as an extremely good guy, but one might wonder at Obama's decision to go with Johnson who helped to select Geraldine Ferraro in 1984--an avid Hillary Clinton supporter this year who observed on the record that Obama owed his lead in the nomination battle to his race--"If Obama was a white man, he would not be in this position." Johnson also helped to select John Edwards in 2004. A famously bad fit for John Kerry, Edwards failed to carry his own state of North Carolina for the ticket. Ferraro fared far worse. Mondale lost 49 states, including Ferraro's home state of New York as well as her congressional district.

Jim Johnson appears to be the ultimate inside player; a Washington smoothie, an establishment power player--former chairman of the Brookings Institution and the Kennedy Center. He is also a former chairman and CEO of Fannie Mae, the federally chartered secondary market mortgage investor. Bill Clinton appointed Bill Daley to Johnson's board. (Fannie Mae executives were recently investigated for allegedly overestimating the agency's earnings in order to reap bigger bonuses. Johnson left Fannie Mae in 1998 and was never charged with wrongdoing.)

Nobody would mistake Johnson, who endorsed and raised funds for Obama early on, as any kind of change agent; unless one meant that he intensely desires a change from republican to democrat in the White House.

Johnson is genuinely close to Bill Daley--Clinton's NAFTA "czar." In my interview with Johnson in 2004 he sang Daley's praises as a man who takes on seemingly impossible tasks, such as passing NAFTA, and gets them done.

Johnson was correct in describing Bill Daley's heroics in helping to push through NAFTA; a trade treaty that Bill Clinton and his aides saw as an almost sure loser. According to a writer for the Chicago Tribune Magazine, Bill Clinton was so pessimistic about NAFTA's chances that he named it the Lazarus Project. Al Gore, whom I interviewed for the profile, gave Daley "virtually 100 percent of the credit.....Nobody thought that we could get [NAFTA], but he was able to pull it out of the bag." Rahm Emanuel, then a Bill Clinton aide now a powerful congressman who has yet to endorse Hillary or Barack, told me in 2004, "Nobody wanted to touch NAFTA."

This is the same NAFTA that became so toxic during the nomination battle this year that both Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama denounced it and promised to renegotiate its terms were they to make it to the Oval Office.

David Bonior, former congressman from Michigan, who this year managed John Edwards's failed attempt to win the presidential nomination, was staunchly opposed to NAFTA, then and now. He told me when I interviewed him for the Chicago magazine piece, ""We had it won until the last week and half," He cited "two or three dozen members of congress, [who] if they don't have passion one way or the other, they stay neutral and get the best deal." Bonior explained that each was trying to get something--a bridge, a change in the treaty "to reflect some economic situation in their district. We didn't have anything to give." The Clinton administration had plenty to give and, charged Bonior, passed out some $20 billion in goodies. Daley was able to win NAFTA, political strategist Don Rose told me, because of his "ability to find everybody's price." Bill Clinton compared the battle to "sausage making," better not to see how it was accomplished."

One thing is certain, "Mr. NAFTA," Bill Daley won't be on Johnson's short list and couldn't be, NAFTA aside, because Daley and Obama are both Illinoisans. Given the importance of rust-belt states such as Ohio and Michigan and Pennsylvania to Obama's prospects in November, one key question Johnson will have pose to potential vice presidential prospects will be, "Which side were you on during the war over NAFTA?"

Comments

[Krikkit]

I fail to see the significance of whether or not Johnson is a "change agent." He will not be selecting the VP, despite the tone of this article. His job is simply to vet those people who might be selected as running mate by the nominee. His job is to dig up dirt, not to promote on any criteria.

Yes, he vetted VP candidates in past elections, but Mondale, Gore and Kerry each CHOSE who would stand at their sides, not Johnson.

Given the level of wisdom Obama has shown in this campaign even during what must have been extremely stressful situations served up by his party rival, I seriously doubt he will make the same mistakes as his predessessors in choosing his running mate.

[dadw5boys]

Obama would do well to keep Liberman away from him!

Liberman has shown his true Republican Colors with his votes the last 4 years.

[RedDogBear]

One more example of why the never ending nightmare of Senator Clinton's campaign is still harming the party. As long as she continues her delusional quest her followers will continue to snipe away at every little decision that Obama makes, trying to distort it and create guilt by association. BTW, I especially liked this bit: "Johnson was correct in describing Bill Daley's heroics in helping to push through NAFTA; a trade treaty that Bill Clinton and his aides saw as an almost sure loser." Making it sound as if Bill Clinton was just standing on the side lines hoping NAFTA would fail. If only it weren't for those evil Obama people who pushed it through! Clintons are getting to be as good as the Bush team at rewriting history.

[dadw5boys]

So your willing to let the PRESS set the agenda and make THOUSANDS OF DEMOCRATES MAD when their state has not even had it's primary?????

LET THE PEOPLE VOTE FIRST!!!!!

[Krikkit]

Why so shrill? The last primaries will be over in a week. No one has ever suggested that those primaries not be held.

[wizened]

Choosing a running mate this year will be particularly difficult. Concerns about race and gender cannot be overlooked, as well as the potentially inconsistent concerns of uniting the party and appealing to independents. I understand your piece not as suggesting that Johnson has in te past chosen people who wouldn't have much appeal this year as running mates for Obama, but rather as suggesting that past Johnson pics weren't effective choices at the time. And thus there is not much reason to believe he will do better this year. Will he just be vetting or will the job involve more than that? How can anyone know for sure?

[obamagirl1968]

I fail to see what Bill Daley and his NAFTA position have to do with Jim Johnson's job for Obama? Johnson will either put together a list based on the criteria set by Obama OR Obama will hand him a list. In either case, it is ultimately Obama who will choose his VP NOT Johnson. He must be good at his job because I don't recall any skeletons about Ferraroro, Edwards or Kerry....

[castrochavez08]

The general tone of the post simply questions why a candidate who is constantly marketed as HOPE and CHANGE, would choose the ultimate insider old boy Johnson to head his search for VP.

For obamagirl to treat it as unimportant is fair to a degree. If this is all there is to it, then it is unimportant.

But what about that Carlyle Group cronie, Moses Mercado? Advisor???

What about Lee Hamilton who worked on the flawed 911 Commission, and was the chair for the pitiful inquiry into Iran/Contra affair which covered some nasty crimes of old man Bush.
He also headed up an inquiry into a secret deal to delay the hostage release by Iran for Ronald Reagan, and again that inquiry was a white wash.

What about Ben Rhodes, Obama speech writer? Brother of FOXNews executive, and special assistant to Lee Hamilton on the Iraq Study Group Report. That report recommends the theft of Iraqi oil.

Then we come back to Johnson and his membership in the Bilderberg group. I don't believe 75% of the sensationalist stuff written about this group, but the 25% I do believe is bad enough. And even if you believe they are just a social club, you have to be seriously disturbed by the membership list.

So obamagirl, care to explain how these additional friends of Barack are also irrelevant. And don't forget when Obama campaigned for Joe Lieberman, helping him defeat Ned Lamont.

[vernonbc]

Too much nonsense to refute each point but Obama campaigned for Lamont after Lamont won the primary nomination. Prior to that, while Lieberman was still the sitting Democratic senator, Obama supported him as did all of the other Democratic senators. Lamont has now endorsed Obama and is a big supporter of his so he must be happy enough with all Obama did for him.

[usabroad]

Just to point out that Ferraro's husband's real estate business had not been fully examined in making the choice and did become a headache for the campaign. The scrutiny that arose as a result of his wife's VP bid eventually resulted in his being indicted (and a guilty plea) and ultimately derailed Ferraro's career in Congress.

[newshawk14]

I usually like your articles Carol but choosing a VP, and vetting a VP are two entirely different
activities. Vetting a candidate is more akin to a security clearance investigation, and with as
few missteps as the Obama campaign has made, I assume they chose Jim Johnson for a
good reason.

[OverIt]

Johnson's role is more of a "find all the skeletons in the closet" than let's make sure we have a love connection. More P.I. than Chuck Woolery. The fit should be a strategic choice by Sen. Obama and the Obama campaign strategists.

[jungpatawan]

I don't think you should mistake the role Johnson is going to play for the role that Cheney played in 2000. Johnson's job will not be to suggest, support or select a candidate, but rather to vet whatever short list Obama hands him.

His job will be to make sure there are no fledgling Eagletons in the nest. No more, no less.

JP

[altohone]

Progressives will have to keep the pressure on.

Americans competing against companies that exploit their workers or pollute at will isn't sustainable.
NAFTA doesn't involve the worst offenders on the planet, but raising standards together could set the bar in a joint effort to deal with them.
Even with majorities in the US, Mexico and Canada less than thrilled with some aspects of the trade agreement, it will still be a battle of the people against big money just to tweak it. Unlike the 90's though, the Clinton campaign rhetoric put the DLC wing on record supporting such efforts, and we can use that to mount a unified approach.

We now know how to deal with the biggest obstacles.
Small donations from millions of Americans can reduce the influence of the special interests, while the maturing of the information age can deal with debunking the myths and spin.
It's time to flex our power.
A strategic approach politically coupled with a focus on those who benefit doing their share for those who lose will be required.
Personally, I'd like to transform the agreement into a tool to advance the progressive movement, rather than killing the agreement outright, but that will mean doing a lot of convincing of those who have paid the price of this deal, not to mention those who gain financially from the status quo.

Carol, I hope you will help highlight any effort. The corporate media are already busy lying and labelling fair traders anti-trade protectionists.

[5thGenDem]

"... one might wonder at Obama's decision to go with Johnson who helped to select Geraldine Ferraro in 1984--an avid Hillary Clinton supporter this year" - Now there's some keen analysis! Twenty four years after Johnson's participation is selecting Ferraro he should somehow now be faulted for not foreseeing her current support of Clinton? Despite the fact that he's been an Obama supporter from the beginning?