iPhone app iPad app Android phone app Android tablet app More

Featuring fresh takes and real-time analysis from HuffPost's signature lineup of contributors
Mike Elk

Mike Elk

Posted: May 19, 2010 03:08 PM

Democrats Won in Murtha's District on Trade Reform

What's Your Reaction:

In 1986, I was born in Rep. John Murtha's district in Westmoreland County, Pennsylvania. Two years later, card-carrying ACLU member Michael Dukakis carried the county by an 11-point margin in a year in which he won only nine states nationally. Despite being a rural, basically all-white county, it stuck by Dukakis due to the concentration of union manufacturing jobs in the district.

Yet in 2008 my home county voted for Republican Sen. John McCain by a 17-point margin. What happened between those years? Democrats sold out on NAFTA, the North American Free-Trade Agreement, and thousands of manufacturing jobs disappeared. Voters in Murtha's district started voting Republican because they felt betrayed by the Democrats. In 2008, Murtha's district was the only district in the country that voted for Sen. John Kerry in 2004 and then voted McCain in 2008.

While Democrats were voted out at the national level in Murtha's district, Murtha was re-elected repeatedly because he brought home defense manufacturing jobs and fought against unfair trade deals. When Murtha died, many political analysts said that no other Democrat would be able to hold onto his district. What they should have said is that no Democrat running on the national Democratic jobs platform could have won.

Instead, Democrat Mark Critz ran on a much more progressive platform of job creation through trade reform. He blasted his Republican candidate for being in favor of tax loopholes that favor companies that outsource jobs, even as the Obama Administration just this week used a lobbyist memo to claim that outsourcing created jobs. On a side note, Critz also blasted his opponent for supporting a value-added tax, something the Obama administration is also considering.

The lesson should be clear: Trade reform is a hugely popular issue on both the left and right. Many conservative Democrats, such as Heath Shuler of North Carolina, used trade issues to propel themselves into office in 2006. In 2008, President Obama pledged to renegotiate NAFTA, something McCain was against, in order to win Ohio. (However, renegotiating trade deals is now considered laughable within the Administration now.)

Trade is also an area where the so called "populist" Tea Party is weak. There is absolutely no mention of trade reform in the Tea Party's official "Contract From America." (See Roger Bybee's great piece on this problem for the Tea Party Movement.) Democrats could easily then seize the high ground on trade.

Trade is an issue that candidates can win on in 2010. Start by passing the Promoting American Jobs and Closing Tax Loopholes Act of 2010, which would extend unemployment benefits, COBRA subsidies, and provide money for jobs programs. In addition, the bill would close tax loopholes that make it profitable for companies to outsource jobs. Blue Dog Democrats have been wary to pass this bill up to this point, but as Blue Dog Mark Critz's experience shows, getting tough on trade is good election politics.

However, if President Obama really wanted to win over voters he could do it by fulfilling his campaign pledge to renegotiate NAFTA (a pledge now considered "laughable" within the Administration). Then Obama could fulfill another campaign promise by slapping tariffs on illegal Chinese currency manipulation which make Chinese goods 25-40% cheaper than American goods.

The great thing about renegotiating NAFTA and slapping tariffs on China is that by law Obama doesn't need congressional approval to do it. He could do it unilaterally and send a huge signal to voters that he, along with those who support this policy, on the side of American workers. The president could use these steps to lay out a bold vision for an industrial policy to rebuild America.

Part of the America's Future Now conference in Washington D.C. from June 7-9 will be devoted to strategy on how the progressive movement can move the president to do this. Speakers such as Van Jones, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, AFL CIO President Richard Trumka, Arianna Huffington will offer a bold vision for how the progressive movement can rebuild America's economy and put people back to work. Click here to attend.

 

Follow Mike Elk on Twitter: www.twitter.com/MikeElk

 
 
  • Comments
  • 9
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Recency  | 
Popularity
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Nickolette Sanello
10:13 AM on 05/26/2010
This is absolutely true. China manipulates it's currency which in turn steals away good middle class jobs.We cannot have an exclusively service sector economy it is totally unsustainable! We built our great middle class,and our wealth by making things! WE NEED TO START MANUFACTURING THINGS IN AMERICA AGAIN!!!!!!!!!
02:54 PM on 05/20/2010
Critz is a right wing democrat and though I agree with him on this one issue it is important to look at his anti-women and the other reactionary views he has. A republican who shares most of his positions would be denounced by many democrats and we should be honest about this new blue dog.
Bernique
Solar is clean, cheap and plentiful
01:48 PM on 05/20/2010
"Amending the agreement with the WTO requires submitting a proposal to the Ministerial Conference. Once the amendment has been accepted, it should only take 90 days to render a consensus. If the United States opts to withdraw, the president would only be required to send a letter to both the Congress and the Director General of the WTO and we would be free of any obligations to the WTO in six months. Until then, per Article VI of the United States Constitution, our agreement with the World Trade Organization “shall be the Supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby.” Likewise, withdrawing from NAFTA would only require a letter from the president to Congress letting them know we would be out in 90 days.

It is time we started negotiating new trade deals with these foreign nations, ones that will benefit American workers and American employers. We need new deals that will make it profitable to manufacture and produce in the United States again. If we do not, our nation may never recover from the damage we are doing to ourselves".

Thomas Heffner

economyincrisis.org
12:45 PM on 05/20/2010
Critz also relied on a very conservative platform of pro-life, pro-gun, anti cap and trade, reducing federal spending and bringing down the national debt to secure that win. Democrats in Congress should not view this win as an affirmation of their ridiculous policies but a warning to change course before they all get the boot. The country is currently on an unsustainable path of unbridled spending and mounting debt, the direct result of which is being played in Greece as we speak.
photo
HUFFPOST BLOGGER
Mike Elk
01:40 PM on 05/20/2010
yes but he differentated himself on trade and jobs. Thats the key to winning on these issues is trade and jobs. Being against something doesnt make voters vote for you, being for something does
photo
HUFFPOST PUNDIT
den1953
The National Inquire of Politics the GOP!
11:25 AM on 05/20/2010
Trade is the only thing that can alter the middle class way of life until Washington levels the playing field with foreign countries no job growth can be realized!
09:37 AM on 05/20/2010
Bingo, great post. This is not a left or right issue. It's an American issue. Tariffs and trade protections served this county well for centuries. Getting rid of them is a huge part of why the jobs picture in this country has gone to crap. "Free trade" only serves the interests of transnational corporate fat-cats, and screws everyone else.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Brett Banditelli
03:53 PM on 05/19/2010
They also won because we got out the vote like it was life or death. Granted, it was!
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
charlietuna11
04:40 PM on 05/19/2010
you did a fantastic job. congratulations. it appeared the seat might go republican.