Posted on 08/25/2003 2:05:47 PM PDT by 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."
You, sir, are willfully ignorant.
There are about 80-100,000 engineers "between jobs" in Silicon Valley alone.
Do you think that Dubya extended unemployment benefits because he had a pile of tax dollars he didn't know what else to do with?
1 year without a job? Something tells me I could at least find a McDonald's or restaurant near you that has a job opening.
Ya know what? Micky D's doesn't offer full time employment to novice burger flippers. They save a bunch on mandated costs, part time Vs. full time.
Ya know what? Wally World won't hire an engineer as a greeter.
Ya know why? Cuz they figure as soon as the economy picks up, you'll go back to your high paying fun job. Right when they need more greeters for the increased customer load.
Ya know what? They're right!
I'd have moved months ago, but I figured my kids need me in their lives. (Their liberal mom won't move. She'd love to be their only political influence.)
BTW, she HATES Texas, refused to move there when a company I worked for relocated way back when we were still married...
Nope .. it was the people that voted for Perot that gave us Clinton .. but I guess they didn't learn a lesson from the 8 year nightmare of him and his commie wife and the 4 year nightmare of Carter .. now they want to threaten us again with a President Dean .. or worse
Oh yea .. that's just what this country needs while we are in a war or terrorism ..
Where??? Certainly not here --- it's far less than that. $40,000 a year is considered very good here. Median doesn't mean the average.
More than you know. I refuse to compromise my integrity by being forced again to choose the "lesser of two evils". True conservatives in politics are almost extinct, and when one does pop his head up and speak, he is crucified by the left and by the RINOS like you.
He can do no wrong. Whatever. I will vote for him. There is no better alternative. I agree with him on many things, on free trade not. But again, it's easier for you to call me a Nader supporter or a Dean supporter. Whatever floats your boat.
I'm still sticking with the Republicans because the Demopukes are ten times worse.
Which of Clinton's economic policies (NAFTA, free trade, Globalist Third Way) has Bush undone?
And it was GHWB that gave Perot the opportunity.
Politics is like the free market, if there's a demand.. you can count on an attempt to fill it.
Per capita, after tax income more than 12 times today what it was in 1960.
It's not class envy damnit it is just well not fair that I have to work for my money and some damned CEO gets to bang his personal assitant while getting paid 1000 times what I make.
Damn it the rich should support me because I am an American and that is what little Tommy Daschle told me to say.
The above testimonail was brought to you by the Free Republic Neo-Luddite League. Proud sponsors of the Brotherhood of the Socialist Liberal Progressive Buggy-whip manufacturers of North America
And one of the most notorious middle men on the scene here is Prescott Bush II, the Prez's Uncle, in his role as chamber of commerce secretary to China. It kinda all fits together doesn't it? When faced with a perplexing conumdrum, follow the money.
Then we are in the same boat here. I disagree with several things he's done as you know, tariffs, farm subsidies, campaign finance, etc.
Let's get something straight: Government taking money at gunpoint = "tax." Call it a "tariff" or a "fee" all you want...it's a "tax."
Only in the Clintonized America are they called "contributions" or other silly euphemisms.
As I stated before and you ignored before, there would be no income tax. I know this just pi--es the hell out of you, but that's what I propose. When I'm proposing, I set the rules. If you want to propose I can ignore you. That's how it works.
Tariffs are no more at a gunpoint than income taxes. In fact import fees wouldn't involve me at all except for a modest increase in those 'so damned cheap' things that we import every day now. That's just one more benefit of moving jobs off shore.
Well some of what you said did remind me of Clinton. Your ignoring my points and spinning your own fantasy were identical to his antics.
Unions. Who said we need unions? They're history.
Unless, of course, you arrange to subsidize them--as tariffs are intended to do.
Tariffs were not designed to subsidize unions, but that's okay. Since we won't have them you don't need to worry your pretty little head about them.
Tariffs would pay the minimal costs of our federal government after it was slapped down and neutered. It would resemble something like what it did we had a constitution. Course we won't have that anymore. Remember, we can cut 90% of our government because we outsouced our leadership to international tribunals.
I like Bush, but I think he needs to do something about this.
There you go...
IMHO, Expect to hear allot more of this in the next year or so.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.