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."
560+ replies to this thread...
Once again, the Power of this issue to derail Bush is underestimated!!
As one person said, Homeland Security for him is He and his Wife working to PAY THE MORTGAGE!!!
You do realize that an observant "merchant" would never ask that much of a debtor:
Deuteronomy 24:6
Do not take a pair of millstones-not even the upper one-as security for a debt, because that would be taking a man's livelihood as security.
So tell me, how does it feeeeel to be a worse "merchant" than a real "merchant"?
This is the same scam that Ben&Jerry pulled. Us poor little old CEOs -- only getting X times the employees. When they decided to retire, they couldn't hire anyone to run the company.
Oh, and this is easily avoided via stock options/awards etc.
The appeal to the less politically astute must be overwhelming...
To review his 'ignore it' MO.
-Bush ignored Clinton's 95% start on Palestine peace and it got worse. -Bush ignored the Arab world and we got 9/11. -Bush ignored NK and now they are working on the bomb. -Bush ignored the economy and we got a crash. -Bush ignored employment and we got a job meltdown. -Bush ignored post-war Iraq and it got worse. -Bush ignored 'old Europe' and now they ignore him. -Bush ignored the budget and now loads future generations with debt.
I don't hold much hope for his 'vision' to improve. The GOP needs a replacement.
There is serious discontent out here in flyover country, but the country club republicans in DC haven't noticed.
The RATS are dusting off their "It's the Economy, Stupid" playbooks as we speak.
If the prices aren't lower, then why can't the domestic producers compete in the marketplace? What's all the talk about 'dumping' goods, etc?
The result is typically higher profit margins for the outsourcing companies.
Profits in all industries tend toward 6% (short of government mandated monopolies). Higher profits encourage more producers to enter the market, lower profits tend to kill off less efficient producers. Capital is fleeing the United States because the tax and regulatory burden is squeezing it out. If a business can't remain profitable in the U.S., it's going to go overseas, or go away. You can't trap capital, human or otherwise, with a Berlin Wall. Commies already went that route, it didn't work. Look what is happening in CA. People (and capital and thus businesses) are fleeing the wreck their government has made of the economy with taxes and regulations. Is the answer to California's problem the ability to impose a tariff on any good imported to the state? Do you think that would help them, or discourage further investment? Keep in mind, the U.S. has long been the recipient of capital from the rest of the world. We rely on it to fund investment in the capital goods that make our people the world's most productive. If the government takes away that advantage with taxes and regulations, people elsewhere in the world will find somewhere else to invest. If we keep devaluing the dollar, they'll do anyway just to protect their savings.
My old boss, the one who let me work 3 months longer for a 50% paycut, wants me to do some consulting!
We're going to dicker about the rate this afternoon. He wants very low, I want enough to survive.
Apparently two of the three H1-B's he replaced me with didn't work out...
He also expects me to work on a patent application for free. Since my name is primary on the patent, and we have a royalty sharing agreement in place, I'm inclined to do it.
No money for it now, but a hope for some in the future...
It is the inverse of a Clintonista. No matter what, the President is always right. Or if they are wrong, it doesn't matter. For Clintonistas, it was ok for Chinagate, filegate, monicagate, etc.. None of it was true, but if it was true, so what, Clinton is so dreamy.
For Bushbots: So what about the artic, Saudi Arabia supporting terrorists, assault weapons ban, the economy, Ted Kennedy's education bill, no tort reform, no standing up for judges. None of that exists, and if it does, it doesn't matter.
Most americans are neither Clintonistas or Bushbots. We accept that they are both politicians with flaws. Those of us on the right side of the aisle as a rule, vote for Bush because he is better than the alternative. A Clintonista or a Bushbot worship the ground their hero walks on.
It's the same with everybody though. There are Nader fans who are convinced the sun won't rise in the morning til Ralph does. While there are greens who like him but find him very flawed. There are also Ron-Bot's, who believe Ron Paul is the most brilliant man in the universe, and don't question his votes on Iraq, or whatever.
Basically we are talking about sycophants. I find it disturbing if it's done towards a politician, an athlete or a celebrity. You have a choice of deluding yourself, or having your hopes dashed when you worship a man, who is flawed like the rest of us.
Sorry to hear about your husband's job loss. What do you want George Bush and the federal government to do about that?
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.