Here's the real message behind the congressional votes on fast-track authority and trade-adjustment assistance: Democrats will no longer support major trade agreements that cost American jobs and create further downward pressure on wages, especially as inequality continues to accelerate.
President Obama won the final vote but not the heart of the majority of Democrats who opposed the Trans-Pacific Partnership that the president can now negotiate on a "fast track."
Consider that this new fast-track trade authority was opposed by every member of the House Democratic leadership and an overwhelming 85 percent of House Democrats; all but two of the Senate leadership and 70 percent of the Democratic senators; and every Democratic candidate for president, including the most likely nominee, Hillary Clinton. The president prevailed by one vote, literally without a single vote to spare.
I've been counting votes long enough to know that it takes only one vote more than the other guy to win. But I also know that when an issue is decided by only one vote, the fight's not over. This isn't 1993, and this is not Bill Clinton's Democratic party.
When President Bill Clinton won passage of the North American Free Trade Agreement in 1993, he had the support of 40 percent of the House Democrats and exactly half of the Senate Democrats. Then, most of the liberal economists, including Paul Krugman, Joseph Stiglitz, and Robert Reich, also enthusiastically backed NAFTA and other agreements critical to the global economy.
I was not a believer and voted against NAFTA, but a decade of expanding trade and rising employment and incomes seemed to confirm that the NAFTA boosters were right -- until the financial crisis, the Great Recession, the absence of any wage growth in the years afterwards and the obscene level of inequality proved them wrong. In this fast-track debate, my colleagues in the Congress and I did not need economists to doubt the administration's claims about the recovery or all the new jobs
Consider more recent history.
The 2012 U.S.-Korea agreement doubled our trade deficit with Korea in the pact's first three years and cost America more than 75,000 jobs, according to the Economic Policy Institute.
The 2009 trade agreement with Peru contained, for the first time, enforceable labor and environmental standards in its core text. Yet last year, Peru significantly weakened its worker and environmental protections. That a Democratic president was responsible for enforcing it made no difference.
And through it all, currency manipulation, mostly by Asian trading partners, was costing American jobs -- 1 to 5 million American jobs, according to the former head of the Peterson Institute, Fred Bergsten. That's 1 to 5 million American jobs lost.
Despite that growing evidence of job loss, former Clinton Treasury Secretary Robert Rubin and his protégés, like Jason Furman, Jack Lew and Larry Summers, all rallied to win support for President Obama's trade agenda. In recent op-eds, Larry Summers barely mentioned the word "jobs" and noted that the global economy is "working spectacularly well for capital and a cosmopolitan elite that moves easily around the world," and not so well for the "middle classes."
Well, Democrats are now mostly not listening, and even the economists have changed their thinking.
Liberal economists are upping their criticism of free markets, deregulation and the American economy, particularly after the publication of Thomas Piketty's Capital in the Twenty-First Century. And they are extending their analysis to trade and globalization.
Here then is the message from a united Democratic Party:
We will no longer take on faith that trade agreements create jobs.
We know an army of corporate lobbyists is writing the rules behind closed doors.
We know those rules are likely to hurt the American workers we represent.
The Democrats' opposition to the trade agreement says we believe, as the people of America know, that American jobs matter. And the fight's not over.
Our 2024 Coverage Needs You
It's Another Trump-Biden Showdown — And We Need Your Help
The Future Of Democracy Is At Stake
Our 2024 Coverage Needs You
Your Loyalty Means The World To Us
As Americans head to the polls in 2024, the very future of our country is at stake. At HuffPost, we believe that a free press is critical to creating well-informed voters. That's why our journalism is free for everyone, even though other newsrooms retreat behind expensive paywalls.
Our journalists will continue to cover the twists and turns during this historic presidential election. With your help, we'll bring you hard-hitting investigations, well-researched analysis and timely takes you can't find elsewhere. Reporting in this current political climate is a responsibility we do not take lightly, and we thank you for your support.
Contribute as little as $2 to keep our news free for all.
Can't afford to donate? Support HuffPost by creating a free account and log in while you read.
The 2024 election is heating up, and women's rights, health care, voting rights, and the very future of democracy are all at stake. Donald Trump will face Joe Biden in the most consequential vote of our time. And HuffPost will be there, covering every twist and turn. America's future hangs in the balance. Would you consider contributing to support our journalism and keep it free for all during this critical season?
HuffPost believes news should be accessible to everyone, regardless of their ability to pay for it. We rely on readers like you to help fund our work. Any contribution you can make — even as little as $2 — goes directly toward supporting the impactful journalism that we will continue to produce this year. Thank you for being part of our story.
Can't afford to donate? Support HuffPost by creating a free account and log in while you read.
It's official: Donald Trump will face Joe Biden this fall in the presidential election. As we face the most consequential presidential election of our time, HuffPost is committed to bringing you up-to-date, accurate news about the 2024 race. While other outlets have retreated behind paywalls, you can trust our news will stay free.
But we can't do it without your help. Reader funding is one of the key ways we support our newsroom. Would you consider making a donation to help fund our news during this critical time? Your contributions are vital to supporting a free press.
Contribute as little as $2 to keep our journalism free and accessible to all.
Can't afford to donate? Support HuffPost by creating a free account and log in while you read.
As Americans head to the polls in 2024, the very future of our country is at stake. At HuffPost, we believe that a free press is critical to creating well-informed voters. That's why our journalism is free for everyone, even though other newsrooms retreat behind expensive paywalls.
Our journalists will continue to cover the twists and turns during this historic presidential election. With your help, we'll bring you hard-hitting investigations, well-researched analysis and timely takes you can't find elsewhere. Reporting in this current political climate is a responsibility we do not take lightly, and we thank you for your support.
Contribute as little as $2 to keep our news free for all.
Can't afford to donate? Support HuffPost by creating a free account and log in while you read.
Dear HuffPost Reader
Thank you for your past contribution to HuffPost. We are sincerely grateful for readers like you who help us ensure that we can keep our journalism free for everyone.
The stakes are high this year, and our 2024 coverage could use continued support. Would you consider becoming a regular HuffPost contributor?
Dear HuffPost Reader
Thank you for your past contribution to HuffPost. We are sincerely grateful for readers like you who help us ensure that we can keep our journalism free for everyone.
The stakes are high this year, and our 2024 coverage could use continued support. If circumstances have changed since you last contributed, we hope you'll consider contributing to HuffPost once more.
Support HuffPostAlready contributed? Log in to hide these messages.