Free trade's victims turning against Bush, GOP

The Herald Sun ^ | August 25, 2003 | associated press

[snopercod]

CHARLOTTE, N.C. -- This year's highly publicized job losses in North Carolina manufacturing, including the Pillowtex bankruptcy, could mean trouble next year for President Bush in a region that was a stronghold in 2000.

Bush won more than 56 percent of the vote in both North Carolina and South Carolina in 2000. But his strong support of free trade has turned some against him in the South, where U.S. trade policies are blamed for the loss of jobs in textiles and other manufacturing sectors.

Andy Warlick, chief executive officer of Parkdale Mills in Gaston County, said he doubts he will repeat his 2000 vote for Bush next year.

"He made a lot of promises and he hasn't delivered on any of them," Warlick said. "I've had some firsthand experience of him sending down trade and commerce officials, but they're just photo ops. It's empty rhetoric."

Fred Reese, the president of Western N.C. Industries, an employers' association, said executives are beginning to raise their voices against Bush and are planning education and voter drives.

"We're seeing a new dynamic where the executives and employees are both beginning to see a real threat to their interests. You're going to see people who traditionally voted Republican switch over," Reese predicted.

The hard feelings were on display days after Pillowtex's July 30 bankruptcy filing, when Republican U.S. Rep. Robin Hayes walked into a Kannapolis auditorium to meet with former workers.

"Thanks for sending the jobs overseas, Robin!" shouted Brenda Miller, a longtime worker at the textile giant's Salisbury plant.

In December 2001 Hayes -- who is an heir to the Cannon family textile fortune -- cast the tie-breaking vote to give Bush the authority to negotiate "fast-track" trade agreements, trade treaties that Congress must vote up or down with no amendments.

At the time, Hayes said he won promises from the Bush administration that it would more strictly enforce existing trade agreements and pressure foreign countries to open their markets to U.S. textiles.

"Are we pleased with the way they responded? Absolutely," Hayes said. "Are we satisfied with where we are? Absolutely not."

Jobs in many industries have fled overseas since 1993, when Congress passed the Clinton-backed North American Free Trade Agreement, or NAFTA. About half the textile and apparel jobs that existed in 1994 are gone.

Since Bush took office in January 2001, it is estimated North Carolina and South Carolina have lost more than 180,000 manufacturing jobs.

And even more textile jobs could be out the door once quotas on Chinese imports expire at the end of next year.

Republican U.S. Rep. Cass Ballenger voted for NAFTA and fast-track, and has seen his 10th District lose nearly 40,000 jobs, primarily in the textile and furniture industries.

"Certainly, there's a political cost to any controversial vote no matter which side you take," he said. "People are casting stones, but we're trying to pick them up and build something."

Democratic U.S. Sen. John Edwards voted against fast-track in 2002 after voting for an earlier version. In 2000 he voted for permanent normal trade relations with China.

Recently, though, while campaigning for the Democratic presidential nomination, Edwards has attacked Bush's trade policies and called for fairer trade measures.

Robert Neal, vice president of the local chapter of the Pillowtex workers' union, said Hayes has worked to try to ease the impact of job losses in his district.

"Though he (Hayes) voted for fast-track, he is really concerned about the workers and their conditions in the state of North Carolina," Neal said.

Not everyone feels that way.

Reese is organizing 1,500 manufacturing companies across North Carolina in an effort to leverage what he calls a new voting bloc.

In South Carolina, voter drives are planned for the first time at Milliken & Co., which has about 30 plants in the state. Mount Vernon Mills of Greenville, S.C., is forming a political action committee.

The company's president Roger Chastain, a one-time Bush voter, doesn't expect to support the president or Jim DeMint, a Republican candidate for the U.S. Senate seat being vacated by Democrat Ernest Hollings.

"We're basically liquidating our whole middle class, polarizing people on the two extremes, have and have-nots," Chastain said of the manufacturing job losses. "We'll be a Third World country."

[scottlang]

God will show you the way, not President Bush.

Amen.

[luckystarmom]

Well, I think this is the more likely scenario.

I have one asset foreign workers will not be able to get. I use to have a top secret clearance when I worked for a defense contractor. I'm going to try to go back to work for a defense contractor and get another clearance going. It shouldn't take but a few months for me to get my clearance. I haven't moved since my old one expired, and I've lived the boring life of a stay-at-home mom.

If I go back to work, then I'll get benefits. My husband could then take care of kids, house, and do contract work from home. My youngest kids start 1st grade today, so taking care of the kids will not be as hard. They'll be gone from 9-3.

We won't get as much money, but my job would be very stable. Defense contractors don't lay off employees with top secret clearances very readily.

[null and void]

I support lower taxes. For anyone, anywhere, every time.

That's the second thing you've said I agree with. Am I losing my mind?

[Mad Dawgg]

"We are all economic free-agents. The power is in our mind and then our pocketbook."

Oh My, I believe I am in love...

Are you by chance of the female persuasion?

Are you Married?

Answer the second question first!

[Mad Dawgg]

"I believe that there were practical business reasons for organizations to evolve into stable nurturing structures."

Hey if you are gonna quote Hillary at least footnote the passages. I believe the above is from chapter three of "It Takes a Village" (Not sure what page though)

[ARCADIA]

Hey if you are gonna quote Hillary at least footnote the passages. I believe the above is from chapter three of "It Takes a Village" (Not sure what page though

I couldn't care less about that carpetbagger or her book. But, feel free to share a comment if you have something to say. Obviously, Hillary and the current crop of political suit stuffing socialist, were knee high to a toddler when these American companies were thriving. The guys who came up with the structure were hardcore free market captains of industry not socialist opportunist.

[GOP_1900AD]

ACTION PLAN TO PROSECUTE INDUSTRIAL TREASON AND ESPIONAGE: THE CORPORATE US NATIONAL RESPONSIBILITY ACT OF 2003

==========================================================

Given:

* The various strikes against the West and our allies, including the EP-3 attack, 9/11 and others, it has become abundantly clear to truly discerning analysts that massive conflict between the Trans-Asian Axis and ourselves, as described by such authors as Jan Sejna, Anatoliy Golitsyn, J.R. Nyquist, Yossef Bodansky, Col. Lunev, and Dr. Alexandr Nemets, is inevitable.

* That in addition to overt threats posed by terrorism and WMD against the West and allies, there are dangerous behaviors that we, in the West and truly allied nations, theoretically have ultimate control over. What we are specifically referring to are behaviors demonstrated by certain corporations based in the US, or operating in the US, which, ultimately, based on the observation in the first paragraph, serve to undermine the security of the West and our allies.

* That certain corporations have, for some years, done, and continue at present, to do, the following things:

A. Sell dual use items and technologies to customers in nation states whose goals include the destruction of the West and our allies.

B. Conduct operations in nations whose goals include the destruction of the West and our allies.

C. Recruit, hire and employ citizens of nations whose goals include the destruction of the West and our allies, both for assignments in their own nations, and, in the West and allied nations.

D. Source supplies and services from nations whose goals include the destruction of the West and our allies.

* That Based on the apparent geopolitical timbre of the times, these behaviors not only constitute a long term threat, due to the likely future supply and business interruptions, of corporations themselves, but may actually constitute treason, espionage and violation of the Patriot Act, among other statutes.

We set forth the motion that:

In order to prevent any further damage to Homeland Security, the following explicit actions shall be mandatory for all US based corporations, and, foreign based corporations' US subsidiaries, under penalty of prosecution via the provisions of the Patriot Act and Treason Act:

1. All employees of corporations based in or operating in the USA and abroad shall be thoroughly investigated by the FBI, US Attorney, Homeland Security, and others as applicable, for treason, espionage and terrorist activity or support. This must include all managers and executives in order to be maximally effective.

2. All operations in, export to and sourcing from, the following nation states shall be ended or proscribed by no later than January 2, 2004:

* The People's Republic of China

* Russia and other former Soviet states

* The Democratic People's Republic of Korea

* Laos

* Vietnam

* Myanmar

* Bangladesh

* Pakistan

* Iran

* Syria

* Sudan

* Zimbabwe

* South Africa

* Angola

* Brazil

* Venezuela

* Cuba

* Libya

3.Focussed investigations shall be made by the CIA and DIA regarding corporate operations involving MCST in Russia, the Russian government and governments of Soviet states, the government and army of the PRC (and companies partly held by them) as well as the government of Pakistan.

4.Aggressive prosecution shall be set forth, for any crimes described herein, of employees, management, executives, partners, board members and others having specific relationships with offending firms.

We surmise that only by taking aggressive action in these regards may we prevent further compromise of our Homeland Security and our position in coming military conflicts.

The penalty for violation of this act, applicable to responsible leaders, key decision makers and applicable authorities in corporations meeting the criteria set forth herein, shall be a minimum fine of US $ 1,000,000,000 and 50 years in Federal maximum security prison and shall not be limited, up to and including death.

[Lael]

Problem is, the Republican Party has OUTSOURCED its FUNDRAISING to India!!

http://theinquirer.net/default.aspx?article=11219

Sorry, I'm temporarily Hyperlink deprived!

But go there, read it and weep!!

Bushco is a one termer...talk about CLUELESS!!!

[Lael]

Problem is, the Republican Party has OUTSOURCED its FUNDRAISING to India!!

http://theinquirer.net/default.aspx?article=11219

Sorry, I'm temporarily Hyperlink deprived!

But go there, read it and weep!!

Bushco is a one termer...talk about CLUELESS!!!

[scottlang]

Problem is, the Republican Party has OUTSOURCED its FUNDRAISING to India!!


I then may have to outsource fundgiving to the dem.

[ARCADIA]

I then may have to outsource fundgiving to the dem.

You should check first to make sure they haven't outsourced their fundrasing to China.

[ninenot]

Good point, although "Wallace" has connotations, too--some of them don't apply to us (I would hope!)

But you are correct, the "Wallace" group was the last gasp of the real, old-time Democratic party. Walt Reuther and George Meany would KILL certain current Union officials who speak against the USA's military, and the deployment of the military for self-defense.

It was also the "Wallace" group that elected Ron Reagan--they became Reagan Republicans. Their beliefs in the economic sphere are precisely guided NOT by money and profit, but with a genuine and positive 'solidarity,' which recognizes the goodness of labor AND the humanity of those who DO the labor.

It's vestigial in some cases--but it's Catholic social doctrine as written up by Pope Leo XIII and later Pope John Paul II. Much of the Midwestern support for Wallace came from VERY Catholic areas (Milwaukee, for example.)

[harpseal]

But what good is it to have a job in an alien nation where hordes of Third World, non-European are rapidly degrading and replacing our values and culture with their own? Where waves upon waves of alien sweeps away the values of our forefathers?

I for one have no problem with leagal immigration abnd most of those that I have known who immgrated leegally from Third World nations have been a nret positive for our society and culture.

As far as immigration reform I would very much personally support increasing teh number of educated qualified hard working immigrants from whatever culture and not admittinmg proabable welfare recipients.

[pyx]

“I suggest that the US Customs Department charge a $1,000-per-container inspection fee on every container entering the United States. This fee would be used to completely fund the cost of inspections. If we assumed that a four-man team could fully inspect two containers a day or about 500 per year, it would require 48,000 inspectors. Allowing for at least 2,000 support personnel, we would need at least 50,000 workers. Because these workers would require high intelligence and skill levels they should earn at least $30 per hour. At 40-hour weeks plus benefits, I estimate the cost per worker to be over $75,000 per year, all paid by the foreign manufacturers. Even so, this would still leave over $2.25 billion to cover all other costs. Any revenue not used would be used to compensate American workers displaced by foreign imports. “

I take it you've never worked in the logistics/transportation business. Many thousands of shipping containers do enter America via ocean ports such as L.A. however, far more cross our borders via rail and countless numbers via tractor trailer with container trailers such as those found here

Many thousands of trailers haul containers across our borders every day in BOTH directions, whether its Canada or Mexico (North<->South and South<->North). Inspecting (unpacking and packing) one container (you said every container) can take many hours depending on its contents. This means there would have to be other factilities to do the inspections. The numbers you suggest are not realistic, imo. With Just In Time (JIT) inventories that assembly and manufacturing companies use to avoid the costs of warehousing and stockpiling, the costs in terms of lost time and inventory overruns alone to support your suggestion would be staggering, imo. I think its better for now that we continue seeing trailers like the one below, moving goods along our highways and railways without the burdens and overhead you are suggesting.



With all due respect, applied achedemic solutions are often not viable nor practicable in the real world.

[ARCADIA]

I think its better for now that we continue seeing trailers like the one below, moving goods along our highways and railways without the burdens and overhead you are suggesting.

No one has a problem with their movement on our highways and railways. The only point of contention is that they should not be allowed to free cross our borders. That sounds reasonable to me. Isn't this exactly what we had in place before NAFTA; why would a mere 5 years make it an unreasonable burden?

[harpseal]

Wekll to be precise it is not my suggestion and I have Not run the numbers. There is nothing magic about the $1,000/container figure that is merely thi sperson's esitimate.

Many thousands of shipping containers do enter America via ocean ports such as L.A. however, far more cross our borders via rail and countless numbers via tractor trailer with container trailers such as those found hereI realized this when I signed on to this suggestuion which id primarily a national security issue.

Many thousands of trailers haul containers across our borders every day in BOTH directions, whether its Canada or Mexico (North<->South and South<->North). Inspecting (unpacking and packing) one container (you said every container) can take many hours depending on its contents. This means there would have to be other factilities to do the inspections. The numbers you suggest are not realistic, imo. With Just In Time (JIT) inventories that assembly and manufacturing companies use to avoid the costs of warehousing and stockpiling, the costs in terms of lost time and inventory overruns alone to support your suggestion would be staggering, imo.

These companies alrrady factor in delivery times for these just in time inventories and additional wait of a day would be minor in comparison.

I think its better for now that we continue seeing trailers like the one below, moving goods along our highways and railways without the burdens and overhead you are suggesting.

As I stated my endorsement was based upon an evaluation of the security risk by some of these containers ( including tractor trailers) coming accross our borders. The risk clearly is a nuclear device in one of these containers. 'll bet teh detination of a couple of nukes in key cities would wreck real havoc with just in time inventories. People are profiting from bringing material accross our borders. If AlQueda succeeds in obtaining a trasnportable nyuclwear device then the rreward is more than worth the cost. What do you have against user fees. Railroads and airlines would not be exempt.

[WRhine]

GW's own policy is enough to turn me off.

You and millions of other Americans. Bush is deluding himself if he thinks that the industry destroying/jobs exporting trade polices his administration supports and promulgates won't cost him a lot of votes in the next election. It most certainly will, just like it did his dad.

[scottlang]

As far as immigration reform I would very much personally support increasing teh number of educated qualified hard working immigrants from whatever culture and not admittinmg proabable welfare recipients.


I have to second that.

[scottlang]

GW's own policy is enough to turn me off.
You and millions of other Americans. Bush is deluding himself if he thinks that the industry destroying/jobs exporting trade polices his administration supports and promulgates won't cost him a lot of votes in the next election. It most certainly will, just like it did his dad.


I agree. The only thing that may save him is that the dems seen heck bent on running an even bigger losers. None of the 11 (I enclude Hillary and Clark) that are possible dem nomines can win against Bush as it stands now. This may change if a dem runs on the it is the economy stupid platform and plays moderate on social issues he/she will stand a good chance.

I wish we had a reagan conservative to support in 2004.

[Poohbah]

Well, that proposed legislation might survive judicial review. But only after you repeal those pesky Fourth, Fifth, Sixth, and Eighth Amendments to the Constitution of the United States. Until then, it's just blatantly unconstitutional.