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."
Who will take a message to Garcia?
I am guessing it is the answer to your particular problem, it is up to you to see if you can figure out the question.
Read Mises, Hayek, or Rothbard? You'll find them enlightening, trust me.
In order to insure the maximum of liberty of a period of time teh US Constitution was ratified thereby pretty much defining the Federal government.
And as Bastiat pointed out it violated liberty at two key junctures, the tariff and slavery. He wrote that they might tear the Republic asunder. He was correct.
RE-YAWN.
The People's Liberation Army (PLA) is planning to set up a second airborne division, based in Hangzhou in eastern coastal Zhejiang province, reported the China-backed Wen Wei Po on Tuesday, citing unidentified sources.
Wow... creating a new division to threaten free Taiwan. That costs money though. Any idea where they are getting the money to pay for it?
What's the math behind supporting Liberty? Fuzzy no doubt! ;) Is its validity as public policy the same as voodo? Call if Voodoo economics if you want, hell I take it as a compliment...
Economics is the study of the distribution of scarce goods and resources by a society. It is not a study of your desires and what you want and how much you want it at a given time
How does one know what goods to produce, or how to distribute them, if they ignore what people want, and when they want it? Like I said, GOSPLAN's slide rule didn't work.
I have read all three and while I agree with some of what they say I do not blindly accept their writings and Hayek accepted mathematical econometrics. I would have to go back to Ludwig von Mises to make thgat statement but as I remember all three accepted the propositions of economics as a science besides economics as a philosophical exercise.
And as Bastiat pointed out it violated liberty at two key junctures, the tariff and slavery. He wrote that they might tear the Republic asunder. He was correct.
Ah and now why pray tell should any American consider Bastiat's irrational rantings in deciding proper policy for the USA? He is a French libertarian extremist polemicist who does not IMHO make any sense whatsoever. By the way I also do not think Islamic law should be used for governing teh lending of money. Now if you subscribe to Batriat I would suggest you seriously consider the philosphy behind American political thought. But clearly this is a personal religous choice on your part and I do not mean to criticise your religion jest do not represent bastiat as an economist.
How much are you offering for?
Deviant ideologies are self selecting. Fascism is attractive to violent, hate filled people. Communism is attractive to resentful intellectuals who want to play God.
Pure free market at all costs ideology, we see, is attractive to people with a pronounced sadistic streak who see themselves as superior to others. Bullies who naturally identify with those who inflict suffering on others. This is not surprising since, like fascism and communism, it is spawned by Social Darwinism. "Might makes Right" thinking tends to attract a certain type of human being.
Hardly quatitative analysis is used by teh cato institute to assess costs to tariffs.
Is its validity as public policy the same as voodo? Call if Voodoo economics if you want, hell I take it as a compliment...
The voodoo I accept it is any justification for the economics part of the appellation I find difficult to accept.
How does one know what goods to produce, or how to distribute them, if they ignore what people want, and when they want it? Like I said, GOSPLAN's slide rule didn't work.
The aggregate law of supply a demnad works for this in a Free market in a command ec0onomy the decision of whovere is in charge determines thsi I am for removal of command elements from the American economy whereever they are sourced.
What is the maxim about assuming?
Who Said I support this lunacy that government is foisting on business?
Most of the ideas(?) on this thread relate to a more-of-the same attitude. My favorite plan presented by your side was to make a law in regards to how much the CEOs of these corporations can make. Punishing them if they dare to make more money than the workers deemed necessary.
That plan is straight from Atlas Shrugged and it would cause a stampede of Blue Chip companies straight to mainland China.
Want to stop the madness, it is really very simple> Get rid of this madness that business has to deal with IN THE USA.
Until that happens more and more companies are going to run from the USA as fast as their little Capitalist hearts can carry them.
And I say more power to them. Shrug Baby Shrug, and send the socialist parasites into oblivion!
Vote Libertarian or write-in someone else.
That's what I'm going to do, check my tag line.
I've had my fill of big-spending, RINO-politics, migrant-loving Bush.
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.