Sign the bill. By being partisan instead of doing what is best for the country, Democrats would be just like the Republican. People are sick of it.
1
So Democrats are “conflicted” between doing what’s best for the country and workers, versus the political downside of agreeing with Trump. Sad to say, the irony here is that Democratic ambivalence proves the Republican point that Democrats care more about politics and their preoccupation with Trump, than with doing right by our country.
2
"The Great Divider" Trump needs the USMCA deal, if only because he's branded himself as a great deal-maker, yet he hasn't made any big ones since he's been in office. His ghost writer for "Art of the Deal" has long labeled him a fraud, and indeed he is. USMCA isn't really a Trump deal because Lighthizer is the prime mover; as with any other Trump presidential "deal" (like the '17 tax law), he's a mere cheerleader.
Yet giving him a rare win is no excuse for not passing USMCA. If Dems' concerns are addressed by Lighthizer and our partners north and south of the border, then they should support it and give Americans a bonus for enduring all the failure, chaos, and bumbling of this administration.
Farmers here in Iowa seem to be touting USMCA, and this state has 3 Dem seats of 4--all with a strong farm interest--to defend in 2020. No need to address Trump's charge that the House Dems are incapable of doing anything, but it would be an easy rebuttal to such nonsense, esp for our Iowa Dems.
1
"Even a blind hog finds a piece of corn sometimes". This applies to trump.He can do something constructive even though he sees it for seems for his own benefits. If its a good deal then the Dems and hopefully the repubs should take it. Trump is being impeached for very definite actions and as long as he isPresident and sems to allow a positive event, take it.
The USMCA trade agreement is separate from the impeachment inquiry. The democrats need to work and compromise with Trump where it benefits Americans. The country comes before politics.
1
The premise of this article is unfounded. Democrats will vote for the bill once it is finalized.
It is disappointing that this article and commenters do not mention Mexico's politics. In particular the 2018 victory of a mostly left coalition led by Lopez Obredor, who had previously just lost in two controversial elections. The coalition included AMLO's social democratic party as well as two smaller parties: the Labor Party (!) and a right-wing party. Wouldn't this be relevant to the proposed trade deal's provisions?
It seems that recent Mexican politics -- affecting the country's 100 million people-- is almost invisible and not a concern to Americans. Shouldn't it be a concern at least to the liberal media and Democrats -- who amply vocalize and moralize about the admittedly terrible developments along the border.
The last Mexican politician to make a dent in the American conscience was high-in-the-saddle Vincente Fox (out 2006); his PAN Party got 22% vote in 2018. Of course drug-gang violence and pervasive corruption are amply covered, and rightly so.
I actually disagree with the premise that because the Dems would side with tRump on an issue that has been dear to our heart. Free and fair trade is in anyway a quandary, especially when some in the GOP will vote against it. It’s actually showing that while they can support a corrupt president they can’t hide their true colors when it comes to corporations vs the people
1
Easy Nancy. Slow this train down. As a concerned citizen I want to hear all the facts and details before our members of the House run-off for a feel-good vote. This bill needs to be fully aired-out so we know what we are getting into and that we don’t have another NAFTA debacle like what was delivered by Bill Clinton and the neo-liberals of yesteryear. American workers, consumers, and the environment doesn’t need to get burned again. The devil is in the details.
Dems are able to chew gum and walk at the same time. Trump uses everything he does as a brag or to trash others whether the action is good or not.
If this agreement works for the US I see no reason why Dems should not accept it and also continue to pursue Trump on Abuse of Power.
1
If it's a good pact for the American worker, bring it to a vote and pass it. Trump got elected in part because he promised to stand up for American manufacturing, and it looks like he's delivered.
The vote next year is going to reflect who Trump is, not necessarily what he's done. Democrats could demonstrate that they are willing to rise above partisanship and deliver for their constituents, and take credit for an attitude that is sorely lacking from Republicans.
If Democrats refuse to move forward on this, in what way are they a better choice?
19
@Paul Downs I totally agree with you!
Trump has lied so much about NAFTA (and everything else) that no one should take the updated NAFTA as good for anyone but Trump himself.
If Pelosi supports it , after some changes , maybe it is worthwhile.
1
"“Taken as a whole, it looks more like an agreement that would’ve been negotiated under the Obama administration,” said Senator Rob Portman, Republican of Ohio..."
Except it wasn't. Why is that?
1
Sorry, but if it has the trump name associated with it, then it should fail.
Reading some of the comments here it seems there are a few, thankfully very few, who insist on damning the President but then support the trade deal. I am a Democratic Socialist, and a dues paying one at that, but to pretend that Trump has not been better on trade policy, has deported fewer people, and has at least tried to roll-back the eternal way machine of the Military Industrial Complex.
1
Democrats simply have to say yes to principles they have long held, Republicans, on the other hand, have to do the right thing for workers - that's the real tough ask here.
Democrats never learn from Republicans: the answer to this trade deal using Republican strategy is very simple - proclaim it insufficient as long as the other side controls the government. Always claim the Republican deal is a bad deal. Always claim the Republicans have been outsmarted.
Will the Democrats use Republican tactics? No, Democrats don't get Republican tactics and practice. Democrats represent the weakling wing of the GOP - incapable/unwilling of truely opposing the GOP from any perspective.
2
Democrats should vote the Trade Agreement on its own merits. They should know by now that Trump will use the vote to his personal advantage anyway.
1
Here is a revolutionary idea: Put the interests of the American people and the country ahead of partisan politics. Maybe then the Democrats will regain the respect they once enjoyed.
1
The headline in print referred to a "quandary" for the Democrats. The Times article set out that the revised NAFTA agreement obtained by the Trump Administration is "one of the most progressive trade pacts ever negotiated by either party," with, moreover, "aspects to it that Democrats have been calling for, for decades," But that, the Times reported, has put Democrats in a "quandary." Democrats face a "difficult choice" because with Congressional approval the revised pact would stand as an accomplishment of the Trump Administration.
One should keep in mind that "quandary" and "difficult choice" when hearing the high-minded rhetoric from Democrats about how a Trump impeachment is necessary to save the Constitution and American democracy and requires all their attention to the exclusion of otherwise governing as in fact they were elected to do.
A foreordained impeachment, by the way, that Democrats know will result in an equally foreordained acquittal in the Senate.
1
If this is good for the country, Dems should vote for it.
Then, each and every day -- they should remind the press that close to 400 Bills passed by the Democratic-controlled House are stalled in the Republican-controlled Senate as they await Republican action.
New NAFTA or no, nothing will make the low skilled manual labor jobs return to American shores. The only solution is moving up the value chain - that means investing in skills and education at all levels. Any new factories under construction today in the USA are majority staffed with robots.
"Trump’s Trade Deal Steals a Page From Democrats’ Playbook"
No, I don't think so. Democrats have never been in favor of either unpredictable, chaotic, approach to US economy, nor they have been in the business of hurting US allies.
If Democrats needed to do something that could run against the interest of an ally, they first give the alley a heads up, consult with the alley and try to jointly find ways that could reduce the negative impacts of the US economic decision on the alley.
Trade agreements are complex, but that’s no excuse for the reporting on it to be so lazy. These agreements have always been a source of genuine controversy within the Dem caucus, regardless of who the President is. Fact check: a Dem did NOT negotiate the original NAFTA, although Pres. Clinton did push through ratification (with lots of GOP votes, and lots of pushback from his own party). And the USMCA is NOT significantly more progressive than the TPP agreement negotiated by Pres. Obama, which also was opposed by many Dems in Congress (and almost all “free trade” GOPers, for reasons mainly driven by spite). USMCA mostly reflects what Canada and Mexico already had agreed to in the TPP, doesn’t fix the glaring enforcement pitfalls that make any new labor standards just as meaningless as the old ones, contains a giant giveaway to big PHARMA, and has a special carve out that allows foreign oil and gas companies to continue dragging our government into private arbitration over environmental regs they don’t like. I know journalists love to frame absolutely every topic as a substance-free partisan power struggle, but I’m missing the central premise here that Dems have anything real to love in this weak reboot of NAFTA.
In terms of manufacturing, how does the new trade deal address technology and robotics? Many manufacturing jobs will never return because of technology improvements.
Two additional facts worth contemplating:
According to the American Farm Bureau Federation, government aid in its various forms, including "trade aid" brought about by the trade war, will make up over 37 percent of farm income this year.
As for tariffs, they continue to tax the middle class to offset a portion of the growing budget deficit brought on by tax breaks that mostly benefited the wealthy.
The reason that tariffs are a middle class tax is simple: the consumption of consumer goods does not correlate directly to wealth. For example, even if someone has twenty times as much money, they do not use twenty times as many washing machines. They do not watch twenty televisions instead of one. So the purchase of consumer goods takes a larger percentage of middle class income. And since tariffs are offset by higher prices, they are a hidden tax on middle class incomes.
2
The reality is that while Trump will brag, I don't see him getting much more that his 63 million from last time.
If the Dems can get those last changes incorporated, they stand to get a strong positive bump, maybe even from farmers.
3
Democrats have been screaming for months about placing The Nation above Party.
HERE is THE perfect example, and they are QUESTIONING whether they should give Trump a "win" ???
I am absolutely no fan of trump, but good grief, this is NOT a party issue. It is What's Good For The Nation.
Period.
Any Dem who votes against this should lose his Congressional seat in 2020.
10
This is clearly an opinion piece. No where have they quoted or actually talked to democrats who say their worried about the politics of passing the bill. They know Trump needs a win and their trying to make the trade agreement even more progressive before they bring it to the floor.
Key phrase: "IF (as in, IF) provisions are enforced...." Then, perhaps, IF they are, some portions of the proposed deal are less objectionable than the original NAFTA.
Does anyone really believe ANY provision of the proposed deal that strengthens workers' rights or environmental protection will be enforced, rather than circumvented by whatever means available, in Mexico, and the US, and in Canada?
There is literally nothing in this administration's record that suggests it is anything but actively hostile to environmental protections, and indifferent at best, despite rhetoric to the contrary, to workers' rights of any kind.
Pelosi would be foolish (or complicit) to agree to contribute to this administration's pro-corporate agenda. And it is naive in the extreme to believe that the gop and trump won't attack her with the same ferocity and with the same set of lies, no matter what she does with NAFTA2.
The reporters' slant, that it is all a political game, is atrocious.
Once again, the much underestimated and maligned Nancy Pelosi is using her power to push the Trump administration, which is desperate for win, to include labor and environmental protections that Democrats have been fighting to include in trade agreements for years
1
Go for it, Dems. Just make sure you repeat, over and over again, and then over and over some more, how you are serving the people, not your party or politics. Contrast your willingness to get something done with the Republicans’ complete lack of cooperation on any legislation the Democrats pass.
I am a west coast liberal and I say get this agreement done. It will be good for the country and will help establish the fairness of the democratic party.. We are always doing what is best for the country.
10
The Dems should pass this if it is a good bill. Don't fall into Trump's trap and demonize everything about him and the GOP. This is government and should operate as such. Go high on this one.
11
Pelosi is wise to wait for Trump's agreed terms in writing! Trump has talked out of both sides of his mouth on virtually every issue. The only hope of avoiding more chaos and confusion is to get it in writing.
7
While there is some risk that the Democrats will give Trump a victory, there is a better chance that they too will win, and perhaps a bigger victory in the long run. The Democrats need to prove to Americans that they care about them, and especially their economic well being. Trade deals like NAFTA were one of the primary assaults on the working and middle class, and why finally, many of them turned on the Dems and voted for Trump.
It may be necessary to push for some further protections for jobs and wages under this new version, but they shouldn't practice partisanship on it, otherwise they risk cutting their noses off to spite their faces. We've lived under a "winner take all" political environment for so long, most have forgotten what a bi-partisan "win" looks like. This would be one of those all but extinct creatures.
And passing this bill would go a long way toward proving to those who simply see this impeachment effort as the Democrats just trying to do anything they can to hurt Trump. But giving him a "win" would poke a hole in that belief.
Frankly, this bill does not go nearly far enough in helping the American workers, but it's a good step in the right direction, and might well provide momentum for further progress.
51
@Kingfish52 ... Thank You, Thank You, for your eloquent comment. Very much appreciated.
I'm too disgusted to think/write that well right now. So, thanks again.
4
As for Trumps role...a broken clock is correct twice a day. Doesn't mean you shouldn't toss it out and get a new one. We need a new model of POTUS. No matter how much better NAFTA 2.0 ends up. Nixon got some truly good things done too, but we don't need a Nixon 2.0 either.
Also, lets come to grips with the facts that Trump adds little to these deals. Sure he might toss in a chip or two, like the Rx drugs part, but that's not his real input, those are other peoples words and wishes. He's not the devil in the details, he's the Devil outside the room, who could kill anything good from this deal with a few tweets.
Who's in the pool, that when this thing arrives on Trump's desk, he somehow fumbles it, and loses the win...? I'm in for a $100.
5
It's hard to trust anything the lying 45 says. I trust Nancy Pelosi to do what's right. There has been no democratic input so hopefully the misleading headlines will not dominate the facts.
2
There's no dilemma here. If this is good for trade and good for the US then just get it passed. The Democrats can easily use this to their advantage. Have a press conference and claim that this proves they put the country first and that the impeachment hearings are not stopping them from passing important bills. Take the high road Democrats.
3
If you didn't like NAFTA, like Campaign Trump, you'll hate USMCA (NAFTA+) negotiated by President Trump.
I happen to believe that NAFTA saved the North American auto industry and attracted assembly plants from all of the biggest automakers from Europe and Asia to the US.
NAFTA+ encourages more auto parts production in Mexico rather than Europe and Asia. And it encourages more assembly work in the US and Canada. Canada has a 30%+ advantage in labor costs, and US labor unions are winning commitments to US investments, so balancing will continue. And both Canada and Mexico have newer, more efficient and lower cost steel mills.
US farmers gained huge exports to Mexico from NAFTA while Mexico provided a year round supply of crops like avocados, tripling US consumer demand.
And the labor union promoting demands that NAFTA+ makes on Mexico are a tough pill for the GOP to swallow.
This is the kind of balanced trade agreement the Democrats should get behind.
6
Free trade = free lunch. This equation does not compute in the real world. There’s no free lunch out here. Only in the White House it exists for those invited to the table. The rest of the folks can eat barnacles from the Chesapeake River.
1
It is odd to say Trump "is stealing from the Dems' Playbook"
and that the Dems "have been fighting for this for years."
No. Both Clintons were wedded to the old Wall Street trade deals Bill pioneered...in which you let financial and other corporate spokesmen meet in secret to hammer out their dream trade agreement, complete with big benefits for international corporations (pharmaceuticals and high tech corps were among the favorites in the Obama-Hillary agreement she described as "the Gold Standard" in trade agreements. Only for the elites, not labor, the environmentalist, or health and safety regulation. International and other large firms especially endorsed ISDS, Investor-State Dispute Settlement, which allowed corporations to sue governments for millions/billions if they passed regulations that "reduced the industry's expected profits." See https://www.citizen.org/wp-content/uploads/investor-state-chart-aug-2018.pdf.
Trump should get credit for insisting on abandoning the elitist trade agreements (which, by the way, were--in the case of Obama's TTIP, also rejected by Europe).
4
It is no more Trump's deal than it is Trudeau's and Freeland's (now our Deputy Prime Minister) or Seade's and López Obrador's. Speaking as a Canadian, I believe that Chrystia Freeland went home pleased with the negotations. Much of what we agreed upon had already been decided or was planned as a part of the NAFTA revisions. We don't consider that Canada made significant concessions and we do see benefits to be gained.
Let us not give President Trump too much credit here. He didn't do this on his own, by any means.
And we shall soon know how well he honours CUSMA's aka USMCA's stipulations if and when it is signed by all three parties involved.
I hope it will accommodate the needs of each country. We have long worked together in partnership and mutual cooperation ought to continue to everyone's satisfaction.
3
Republicans have abandoned all their other "principles" under Trump so why not abandon their stand against organized labor and corporations over people and vote for this bill? The Democrats simply have to say yes to principles they have long held, Republicans, on the other hand, have to do the right thing for workers - that's the real tough ask here.
4
I'm confused, one minute the article makes it sound like Dems and GOP are worlds apart and next minute it's near completion after hammering out a few final details - wait, isn't that an example of how our democracy is supposed to work?
The Dems will not get hurt by this legislation - if anything they should use it to their advantage. But again, as usual, they are losing the message battle. They can be the party of America first by going after deals that help Americans while prosecuting alleged criminals (I only say 'alleged' because the impeachment trial hasn't begun - only the fact finding part is complete, or mostly complete?).
2
Trump is essentially a 1990's Labor Democrat.
He is skeptical of unfair free trade deals, generally against foreign military intervention, and tough on illegal immigration.
Trump has never changed.
The Democrats did.
5
Trump will pull this deal or try to change it as soon as the Dems agree to it, just so he can say Democrats ranked it even though he’s the one.
He did it on guns, he’ll do it again on trade.
3
Another clear victory for President Trump.
No matter what the Democratic House is forced to do by Nancy.
More reasons he is re-elected.
5
Uh...since it ain’t been passed yet, won’t get passed without further concessions, and already contained a fair amount of leftishness, I’m not really seeing how this is a “clear victory,” for Hizzoner.
Could you explain, please? And please be detailed; a general rant about lib’ruls don’t impress me much.
Very hard to follow your logic ... trump does things only to distract from what he should be doing... a fraud...
Democrats should consider supporting the agreement on its merits and decouple it from the impeachment inquiry. Please share details of the measure with constituents!
2
So, should he be impeached for plagiarizing?
2
Lock-in in higher drug prices, sham unions in Mexico that will be overlooked, enforcement lowered.
Tell me how does a car that is not 100% made in the USA avoid a tariff?
This deal stinks.
2
More details please. And please link to the legislation proposed so we can review it.
2
last time i looked at a map of the world, mexico was part of north american. have the continents been rearranged?
2
America First, defeating Trump Second,
Nancy, please pass this into law.
1
It is my understanding that North America includes Canada, The United States of America, and all the States of Mexico. Why will the new pact prevent more car manufacturing in Mexico?
2
We'll see.
Seems like Pelosi is hellbent on making Americans suffer even more while she focuses 100% of her time on Impeachment and 0% of her time on issues that matter most; like improving ACA and signing this trade deal.
By the way..wonder how much progress the House Intelligence Committee is making on protecting our interests with the Iranian Revolution happening right here right now...?
Seems like the IC missed this one too.
Thankfully Twitter works in Tehran..and the rest of the media world found out.
4
It will seriously damage the image of the Democratic Party if they flagrantly refuse to pass legislation which is crystal clear to the American people to be in America's best interest. That would indeed be putting their vested self political interests ahead that of the people they supposedly serve. Perhaps a more egregious crime than they will be censuring Trump for.
6
Steal? That seems like the wrong word. The article makes clear that both Democrats and Republicans and Mexico had a lot of input in the negotiations of a document that is more than 2000 pages in length. It sounds to me like a “deal”. If Republicans in the Senate pass the bill with a large margin and Democrats in the House refuse to vote on it, Democrats are doomed the next election.
5
Why do Americans think they and only they design treaties? Without Canada’s Chrystia Freeland, this so-called ‘free trade’ treaty would not be close to acceptable for all participants...
I agree with Rom and Voter. Hasn't the Democratic stance all along been that if business can get done in the present impeachment environment, then indeed the people's business is there to be acted on. Wouldn't everyone welcome, for example, a specific and doable infrastructure plan, even if it came from the President?
Remember that during the absurd attempt to impeach Bill Clinton, the President very conspicuously went about doing his job. Trump appears to be incapable of separating the people's business from his own, but if he is really behind this plan and it represents an improvement over the status quo ante, why not give it a hearing? The Democrats would look god-awful if they declared that nothing matters other than impeachment.
1
This “dilemma” for Democrats seems contrived by the writer. If it’s a good pact for their constituents, American workers, they’ll vote for it, as they should and as Ms. Pelosi makes clear.
Republicans, on the other hand, have a different set of constituents - wealthy donors and multinational corporations - which their comments point to.
4
As long as there are human hands manipulating this agreement, there will be shortfalls. The GOP, still being an irritant rather than a lubricant is saying this is not us. The Democrats are stunned by cooperation from the right. Bi-partisanship is a necessity if we are to ever get the Nation’s congressional decision makers to look out for the country’s best interests. We need agreement by compromise now in the US government to right our politics to good effect.
4
Forget the politics. What we need is fair trade. Haven’t read the proposed deal but if it does not assure fair trade keep negotiating.
The term free trade is camouflage for multinationals shipping US jobs overseas.
34
@Buck
Fair trade is also code. Its code for nothing meaningful or concrete. Its code for we have no idea how to define something that has no definable parameters.
What is fair trade? And who sets the parameters? How does a small farm compete with an Agricultural-Industrial giant, fairly...? How do you rig the system to get the small farm up with the industrial giant? The small machine shop, say in a minority community, employing non-traditional employees (like minority females) on par with larger, long established ones manned by mostly men, with long established lines of resources?
How do you help a burgeoning foreign industry to grow, and expand, if you don't give them some advantages in our markets? Or dont curtail the monopolistic tendencies of Big US firms to steam-roll players in small foreign markets?
I think what you mean by fair trade is what Trump thinks. Zero-Sum Gain, all the positives in our direction.
3
If it's good for the country, Democrats should vote for it.
If it's not, they shouldn't.
Republicans had ample opportunity to participate in creating the Affordable Care Act (Obamacare) in 2009 and 2010, but they flat out refused to participate.
Then, they refused to vote for it.
Now, they continue to try to strike it down even though it helps millions of people, Republican and Democrat, throughout the country.
Democrats, who are strong advocates of good government, need to set an example by supporting good legislation, no matter the party of the President who will sign it. If this turns out to be good, Democrats should pass it.
4
Republicans were not allowed to participate in the over, year long negotiations by Democrats about whose special interests would be taken care of in the Obamacare law.
1
@John Bowman
"When Democrats passed the Affordable Care Act in 2010 without a single Republican vote, they were criticized for being too partisan. In the end, however, the bill included many Republican ideas.
"The keystone principle of the Act -- a mandate that all Americans buy health insurance -- is rooted in Conservative thinking. Additionally, the Democratic-controlled House and Senate committees adopted nearly 190 Republican amendments while writing the legislation, according to data compiled by the New York Times."
-- "Obamacare included Republican ideas, but the GOP Health Plan Has Left Democrats Out", New York Times, July 21, 2017
1
That is absolute nonsense, John. And nonsense a lot like the nonsense of yelling that Republicans have been denied the right to cross-examine witnesses and present their evidence in the impeachment hearings.
It’s not Obama’s fault that you guys couldn’t get your act together, or that you’re devoid of ideas, or that you elected the likes of Louis Gohmert and handed him a megaphone.
The pact won’t be perfect. Still, it might be heartening to many of the politically war-weary among us if the negotiators can puzzle out the labor piece and declare victory for the greater good.
A moment of political peace on earth might not come amiss.
3
Here's a novel idea, Dems for economic growth and prosperity by supporting free trade and open markets. Time to abandon mercantilism by focusing on what comparative advantages or country still has. Trumpites are picking up votes from constituencies that were in the past democratic strongholds like unions. How about Dems tapping into Repub voters by embracing trade policies that make our country competitive rather than protectionist.
3
I'm curious exactly how the proposed deal differs (yes I've seen bits and pieces of how but no details) from the current NAFTA agreement and more to the point how it differs from the Pacific agreement that Trump trashed. My understanding, right or wrong, is that the proposed agreement is NAFTA modified to look a lot like the trashed Pacific agreement. If so I would like to see some focus on that fact, if correct.
I would like to see this topic covered in the Democratic debates. If the Democrats want to win back the rural votes and the House or Representatives, they need to work to close the loopholes in this bill and ultimately vote for it as long as it if it really can help stem the flow of jobs overseas, even if it is only incremental.
If it is just another symbolic gesture like Trump's overly expensive wall then they should not vote for it, but the American people deserve the right to know the details of this bill. For many of the former Democrats who voted for Trump, it is more important than the impeachment hearings.
There used to be factories all over the South and Midwest where workers were well behaved and rarely joined labor unions. NAFTA and other free trade deals made it easy for corporations to move many of those factories overseas, where they could hire people at even lower wages. Both Democrats and Republicans voted for these trade deals that turned these little factory towns dead end towns.
The free trade deals were not the only reason why those jobs disappeared. Robotics was another cause. But Democrats need to return to their former support for labor or Trump will win another election in 2020 by pretending to care about those towns.
73
@Robert Scull - The #StopTPP movement across the midwest and rustbelt is why Hillary Clinton lost big-time in the 2016 race, based on Electoral College votes. Both Senator Sanders and Donald Trump were opposed to TPP. Sanders called it, "another lousy trade agreement like NAFTA that fails to protect American workers." Bernie Sanders won those states in the primary elections, and always had higher electability ratings that Clinton. But of course, we know now that the DNC had already turned everything over to the Clinton insiders, who coordinated with corporate media to smear Sanders and elect Trump.
Clinton had no pathway to win in the rustbelt, so she went for the Southern route -- and lost those key swing states as well.
14
@mjpezzi
I agree. The Democratic Party lost its way due to large campaign contributions from Wall Street. Hopefully, Bernie Sanders will be able restore a record of accomplishments comparable to those of the Roosevelt-Truman and Kennedy-Johnson years.
8
@Robert Scull News flash: automation will hit those factories moved overseas sooner or later. Any kind of repetitive task in manufacturing will eventually be replaced by automation. We should be figuring out how to deal with this fact instead of whining about the jobs going elsewhere, where they will die out too.
As for Democrats support for labor, I find your last sentence fascinating: "But Democrats need to return to their former support for labor or Trump will win another election in 2020 by pretending to care about those towns." Democrats seem to have always supported labor, NAFTA notwithstanding - just as we ignore the effects of automation still, no one predicted how that factor would affect the implementation of NAFTA over time. Democrats just seem to assume people know of their support, and find it distasteful to lie to labor to get their votes like Trump and the Trumpublicans do.
Hillary Clinton and Obama told coal country to develop a new strategy. Coal country didn't like that and went for Trump. Coal country is still hurting, even though Trump regulation roll-backs make the corporations more profitable on the backs of coal workers, and populations hurt by environmental destruction. You want a nice, comfortable lie? Or the truth, and an offer to figure out a better path forward? The latter is hard; unfortunately, because people are, too often, kind of lazy.
11
Make the deal. Laws and agreements should be passed no matter what. We the people didn't send you to Washington D.C. just to impeach. We want you to work together for the betterment of all. So if the deal is better then do your job..
2
Trump's daily lies and outrages are a double edged sword. On the one hand it is difficult to pin him down on anything, but on the other he is never able to capitalize on positive moves his administration makes. Whenever his public image is on the upswing thanks to good news, he feels empowered to indulge his petty ego, which in turn upends the narrative. He's like someone on a diet who thinks taking the stairs instead of the elevator gives him an excuse to eat a chocolate cake. The Democrats should vote for this with the expectation that Trump will almost instantly self-immolate.
2
If the Democrats were Republicans, they would all vote no in unison. They'd lean on their cultivated media outlet to exaggerate problems with the deal and maybe fabricate a few further issues that would eventually be revealed as lies, but well after the vote was done and attention had moved on.
Even if it hurt their constituents, they'd use this as an opportunity to tell their base about how the president is a sellout, and reiterate that the other guys are all stupid but also capable of constructing a global scheme to oppress Noble American Heroes (who naturally align with the base's demographics) and take their jobs. Because of their clear-eyed view of the challenges of the day, the base would have no choice but to accept their own sacrifice as necessary to uphold the American Way of Life.
3
I don't care if the agreement is with Jesus or the father himself. All democrats have to remember is McConnell's pledge to make Obama a one turn president or his refusal to sit a Supreme Court justice.
4
If Democrats stand in the way of a good trade deal that benefits the US and its citizens, then they are signing their own death warrant. Move past partisanship and do what is best for the US and its people.
4
No one says this for republicans.
2
He did not craft anything. It is the same deal watered down.
3
This is still a bad deal.
First, ISDS! They have done nothing about ISDS, Investor State Dispute Settlements, which precludes protections for the US and its clients.
A great example of that was the Canadian pipeline, which prevailed over the US. That "judicial panel" were not judges, but attorneys who would decide that case.
And the in next case, those attorneys who sat as "judges" for the Canadian pipeline, become the attorneys for a "new case and client".
And the attorneys who previously acted as the client's attorneys in the pipeline , now become "judges" in the new case.
That's incestuous and wrong!
How many will lose financial and other benefits, because they cannot have their cases heard by real judges, and not impartial, conflicted, alternating attorneys?
Second, prescription drugs!
We and not Big Pharma were supposed to negotiate prices for 250 drugs, including biologics.
Pelosi would now allow them 10 years of profits. Why 10 years? Why not two or five years!
And Pharma wouldn't even negotiate to 25 meds, let alone 250 meds which is reasonable!
How many people will die over the next 10 years because of those Pharma profits, instead of negotiating affordable prices?
Can one guess what happened? Pharma continues to thrive.
And which federal officials, GOP and Dems elected and appointed, may or have derived financial contributions from ISDS and big Pharma?
Not us! We the people continue to be the losers.
1
Although I hate giving Trump a win, it sounds too good to pass up. It will not stem the manufacturing losses (not do tariffs), but if it makes Mexico a safer, more humane place for labor, it will do much to give us access to a more prosperous market for goods and services in two growing countries next door. Maybe we can find a way to open our borders to Mexican people we need working in our economy as well, given the aging our our population.
By the way, $16 dollars for auto workers is only $1 above minimum wage in some cities and ensures lower pay for auto workers, it higher pay. In a few years the minimum may be $15 everywhere, making this part of the deal basically irrelevant.
1
No sense giving trump the talking win when Democrats did all the work to make the agreement more beneficial to workers, the environment and the nations who participate.
3
Sounds good to me as long as pharma protections of any sorts are not included or allow consumers to reimport the drugs for same prices as sold in foreign countries.
Dems will come out winners. May as well use Trump for something they want.
1
All the good things in any pact are pointless if it also “guts existing enforcement practices”
#MoscowMitch blocks any legislation a Democratic president wants and then the GOP propaganda apparatus blames them.
Pelosi should just stall the bill and say it needs tweaks.
1
This is not a problem. Take the deal because it's a good deal. It's also good politics - "we are willing to work with trump when he gets it right, but we will stand up for the Constitution when he is dead wrong."
3
"“What’s in it for Pelosi?” asked Senator Ben Sasse, Republican of Nebraska."
Maybe, just maybe Pelosi and congressional Democrats actually care about rebuilding America's middle class. And in renegotiating trade deals, Trump presents an opportunity to do so.
I know it is a hard for most Republican politicians to understand this idea. Especially those from welfare states like Nebraska that cater to energy and agricultural oligarchs with taxpayer-funded subsidies and bailouts. But, even Nancy Pelosi recognizes an opportunity to do something that pulls the Democratic party back to its pre-Clinton era middle-class supporting roots.
2
Why would we back a trade treaty that works to protect the high profits of the pharmaceuticals?
3
During every election season the candidates promise to "work across the aile" for the people. During the entire rest of the time, every headline reads Democrats vs Republicans. Working across the ailes is a consistently failed campaign promise we need to start calling them all on the carpet for.
They play party politics because "we the people" play party politics.
1
The trouble is that nothing will stop the decline of jobs in US manufacturing: automation more than anything else accounts for the decline here and across the world. In this the Democrats are just as bad as Trump—"protections" of the kind proposed in the new deal don't work in a global economy.
3
Trump voters that I know were under the impression that, with the almighty power of the TV star, he was going to bring back all the blue collar jobs that have moved overseas.
USMCA will certainly not do that. It will create mountains of paperwork to keep white-collar workers and lawyers busy for the next 30 years, and give Democratic lawmakers that extremely rare feeling of pious righteousness that keeps them going day to day.
Pass it, sure. Then campaign in the midwest on a simple message: Did any jobs come back?
1
I'm not seeing any environmental details here. Will tougher environmental standards by one jurisdiction or another be protected or defensible, with a strong premise to allow them? Nothing on climate change or the at least equally scary problem of endangered species.
These two wicked problems are going to take everything we've got. It's past time they are put on a par with other trade issues, both as a statement, and as another way to make economics work towards their protection instead of against them.
The Democratic House should swiftly pass this deal. It is the right policy for the country, it aligns with their traditional values, and it is also politically expedient. The Times also had an article where people were critiquing moderate Democrats for 'only investigating' the President. This can divorce governing from impeachment and make the latter process look more non-partisan. Lastly this takes Trump's best issue with Midwestern swing voters away from him in 2020 while putting more traditionally economically conservative GOP senators on notice.
3
If we imagine this kind of headline 6 years ago it would have some key differences:
Obama's Trade Deal Steals a Page From Republicans’ Playbook
The president has made a trade agreement that caters to his opposition — and it stands no chance of passing Congress.
16
@Justin who says: "The president has made a trade agreement that caters to his opposition — and it stands no chance of passing Congress."
Aww, that's just your wishful thinking.
If it’s a good trade deal then pass it. It’d be taking a page out of the Republican play book to put party over people and I’d really not like to see the Democrats stoop to that level.
And how would agreeing to a bipartisan trade agreement reflect poorly on Democrats? Last time I checked people love when the government operates in the interest of its constituents. Let’s not solidify turning politics into a back and forth of spiting the other side all while hurting the actual American people.
66
It would be wonderful if it worked that way. Sadly the story will play that trump forwarded a great bill, and the hard work the Democrats did to make a better agreement will be buried under the smoke & mirrors.
6
@KaneSugar
You are correct. That said, if it is a good bill, it should be passed. It is time to stop the two parties from blocking everything the other party wants. Once upon a time, there were bipartisan agreements. If Trump wants to actually extend an olive branch to the Democrats (and that would be a first), they should grab it with both hands. Vote for what is best for Americans not what is best for the party.
24
@ExPatMX
It's time people like you quit it with the false equivalencies. One party gets EVERYTHING they want, all the time, and one party BLOCKS everything the other party wants to do all the time. This isn't a game with trophies and a new season coming up. This is reality and the republican party is only interested in itself.
Take a look at all the riders attached. You'll see that NONE of this is "BEST" for Americans, only best for certain "American" corporations.
1
Trump may be the worst CEO to ever be in charge of the "presidency" of the United States government. Nevertheless, we must give credit where credit is due. If his trade agreements are to the benefit of the American people, by all means the Democrats should sign off on them. If the Democrats approve of his policy Republican reactionaries will disagree. Besides Trump will probably just veto his own policy either just to be contrary or after being convinced by the last person who whispers into his ear. Trump can be right sometimes, not because he has actually carefully thought through the choices and decided based on best intelligence and rational thought. Trump can be right the same way a stopped clock is right twice a day.
41
Take out the protections for the high pharmaceutical prices and I’d agree.
11
@RLW
I'll rely on the broken clock to be correct twice a day.
@RLW
Well, Trump and his great business sense, has shown all of us that there are very serious CEO's who really know what they are doing and there are CEO's who have no clue.
Yes a broken clock is right twice a day but a businessman being American President shows that if a country is nothing but greed and self righteousness no one wants to listen to a high school bully.
The world is not a business meeting and life is not what you are worth. This individual who is a draft dodger and who treats everyone as servants, is always looking to get over. Since he is just an ignorant white man he has been successful in achieving his goals but as a businessman he is a terrible failure.
"The word 'Bipartisan' usually means some larger-than-usual deception is being carried out."
-George Carlin
Be very weary of this trade deal.
3
Enough hyper-partisanship. If there is a consensus on both sides of the aisle that the revised trade agreement is good for America, then it should be ratified - regardless of which party originally came up with the trade positions or who will ultimately get credit for it.
And that, Congress, is how you put America first.
8
Clinton coopted much of the Republican agenda. And, ironically, Trump got elected espousing much of the trade and foreign policy rhetoric of Sanders. I am not a fan of Trump, but he is a very good politician, adept at holding his base (honed from years of reality TV and holding his audience). Unless the economy sinks, Trump will be re-elected and trade deals will be central to his re election strategy.
7
@Ben Smith "...he is a very good politician..."
No, he is not. Not in the least. He was good at getting elected, but he has been a horrible politician by any measure. He has proven himself inept at diplomacy or negotiating effectively whether domestically or on the international stage.
American tycoons and globalists should not be allowed to close American factories and open in countries like Mexico and China and import to this country without any tariff thus enriching themselves and hurting American workers. It is not free trade, it is exploitation of the poor conditions there at the expense of American workers. The Govt. must make it difficult to close the factories here and to import to this country goods produced there. China exploited the situation and enriched itself and reached a level capable of destroying and had a plan to dominate America's core industries. Luckily we have elected a President who is capable to challenge China's malevolent intentions and exploitations. I don't know how Democrats can call themselves as the party of working class.
7
After all the damage done to his supporters in the Midwest, tRump is just trying to save some of those votes, by using the Democratic way. It's not that he wants to do it--he loves to see people suffer, but I think his victims have realized that and will not make the same mistake. It's too late to try to appear as if he cares about his country. He doesn't. He cares only about himself, his power, his money, his stable genius, his unmatched wisdom. He has sold all of us down the river.
5
Why does passing a bill that's good for the people negate the need for impeachment? Can't we do both? Do you really think educated voters will give trump credit for the trade deal, even though he will claim he did it all himself?
If Dems pass the bill they prove that they are NOT the ones holding up legislation and take another false talking point away from the Republicans.
7
Democrats should pay close attention to ensure “all” their requirements are met. The goal post can be moved until Trump meets all needed amendments.
1
A new poll taken by YouGov says the Majority of Republicans think Trump is a better president than Lincoln! So I think the Democrats should give up on those people and register new voters. Hence, if this trade deal isn’t good for America, then forget the politics.
5
The Democrats should demonstrate that they can walk and chew gum at the same time. Get the trade deal done AND press forward with impeachment. Simply put, they were elected to serve the people as well as the Constitution.
2
you forgot to mention that $16 an hour is an average.
this means that the CEO and upper management can make $500 an hour, while the average either makes $2. there needs to be a minimum wage, not an average wage
2
The main problem with USMCA is Trump. His insults and attacks, his lies about what NAFTA is and what the new deal is, and they way he destroyed the relationships with Canada and Mexico are the issue. Did NAFTA need updating for modern technology and other changes of the last 25 years? Sure. Would Canada and Mexico have quietly discussed and agreed to changes? Definitely. Is the USMCA bascially what PPP would have been with some extra anti-Mexican auto rules? Sure.
If Trump were not President, this would pass quickly. He is the creating the problems and then yelling about why they are not solved.
1
The Democrats should be talking about how they have won, how they forced the President to include items that work for common people, not just billionaires.
2
As always, for Republicans who want to win without cheating, there’s a ready solution: Act like Democrats.
1
I see this as a win for the Democratic Party once more labor and environmental rules are put into place that they want. Yes, Trump supporters will say it's all him, but the majority of voters who actually read, will understand the truth. And, this is key, Democrats can run on this.
1
Unfortunately the majority of voters do not read.
7
@Fed up Isn’t that sad?
He shamelessly steals a page from our playbook to boost around like "a hero to workers". But none of our candidates will do a Clintonesque triangulation on him and declare we ALL support strong immigration policies including criminalizing illegal border-crossing.
3
This is such a messaging opportunity for the Democrats.
Republicans want the new NAFTA to lock in high drug prices - Democrats stand up for us and refuse to cave in to big pharma.
Republicans think this is a bad deal [quote a few], Democrats are working to save US jobs.
Trump has offended many of our allies with his tariff wars, now he wants to make Canada pay.
But the Democrats will not do this messaging, or anything similar. Shame on them.
1
The oligarchs of both parties, Democrats and Republicans, and the nytimes, have pushed "free trade" deals for half a century. These agreements put American citizens in direct competition with semi-slave(minuscule salary, no enforced health/safety regs., no enforced environmental regs.) labor in China, Mexico, etc. Simultaneously, the nytimes trumpets special concern for women and ethnic and racial minorities. But the majority of the 2 million people whose jobs were lost as textile and apparel production left the USA were women and racial and ethnic minorities !! See the book Empty Mills.
3
Odd that there is a dilemma for the Democrats at all. There should not be. Vote for what's best for your constituents back home, don't lose sight of this, we the people are who you work for not the party you are beholden to.
244
@Voter Read the whole article and especially this part: Several sticking points remain, including a provision that offers an advanced class of drugs 10 years of protection from cheaper alternatives, which Democratic lawmakers say would lock in high drug prices.
Other Democratic proposals aim to add teeth to the pact’s labor and environmental provisions. Democrats want to reverse a change made by the Trump administration that they say essentially guts NAFTA’s enforcement system. They are also arguing for additional resources that would allow customs officials to inspect factories or stop goods at the border if companies violate labor rules.
111
@Voter
The Left, including Bernie have been demanding these cleaned for decades.
If Trump is willing to sign it, let him, then take credit for it.
Trump stole Bernie's platform. That's why he won. Don't let him trick Democrats into voting against their own policies.
13
@elaine farrant --Corporate Dems don't care about that. They get a lot of their money from Big Pharma. Check your representative's donors. You'll see.
8
The key takeaway should be that Trump's actual policies are more moderate than either the Democrats or Republicans. He proposes to help US workers, end pointless foreign wars, and clean up Washington.
I suspect that many voters who don't vote in the primaries will be supporting Trump in the general election, not because they think Trump is a fine fellow, but because they like these policies.
3
@Jonathan You need to follow the actual events surrounding Trump. He does nothing of the sort, although his followers certainly think so.
4
Democrats choose country over party. They will pass the Trade Deal if it is good for America, they won't if it's not.
2
This is another bad trade deal spun by the media and corporate Democrats as some kind of improvement. Why is the 10 year protection for high priced drugs in this deal at all? It's not relevant to a so-called trade deal. But it is relevant to the work of lobbyists who always get their way in Washington. Thank you corporate Democrat Rep. Neal for bending to their wishes once again. And the so-called $16 wage level protection is a complete joke. To begin with, it does not apply to 60% of the content of the cars at all. And why is it an "average" wage instead of a minimum. And why is it tied to content instead of to workers themselves. These are all provisions that lawyers, accountants, and media spinmeisters will make the wage protections meaningless.
2
And what about all those bills already passed in the House that are waiting for McConnell to take up in the Senate?
3
Discussions around U.S.M.C.A. seem to focus a spotlight on auto parts manufacturing, which is relevant of course to North American trade, and automakers such as GM have been criticized regarding establishment of manufacturing plants built in Mexico to take advantage of lower wages and worker benefits costs. Fine. But auto makers are not the only businesses we should be looking at. why doesn't the Administration take action to penalize U.S.-based companies like Apple that outsource all their manufacturing to China?
6
"House Democrats return to Washington on Monday facing a difficult choice: Should they hand President Trump a victory in the midst of a heated impeachment battle or walk away from one of the most progressive trade pacts ever negotiated by either party?"
Again, the NYT framing the argument as victory and defeat, instead of good or bad for the country. Shame on you! This isn't a team sport, get that through your heads.
39
They would not be doing their jobs if they didn’t frame the reporting that way. It is naive to think that lawmakers would not view it through a partisan lens- that’s how the current ugly system works. To report otherwise would be pure fiction. Newsflash: Most US Congressmen answer to their donors, not the American people. And the data supports that (see Joe Biden’s record on the bankruptcy bill, crime bill, and the hundreds of thousands he proudly accepts from the financial services industry).
This is one of those moments where adult conversations need to be had:
There is a lot that's bad about the Trump administration, but that doesn't mean that it won't do some good for the nation. People. organisations and society can be bad and good at the same time.
It doesn't matter which side of the aisle does something good for the country. The important part is that it's good for the country as a whole. Credit given where it's due shows a higher level of ethics and morailty.
Politics shouldn't enter into something that is cleary good, or bad, for a nation. If leaders make things better then they should be heralded for it, not demonised by the opposition because it doesn't suit an election. If leaders make things worse for the nation, then they should have to face the consequences of that action.
When the politicians of the world start thinking bigger than their parties colours, the rest of us will start to win.
2
Wow, sounds like a great un-free trade deal. Wonderful for the car and steel industry, which constitute only one sector, but bad for consumers all over the country. How times change.
However Democrats should vote for what they believe is good for the country. Nice opportunity too to demonstrate they are non partisan. Not that it will change anyone’s mind about Democrats.
3
I noted a key phrase. Pelosi wants a Trump to “put it in writing”. Given Trump’s mercurial nature, habit of being influenced by the last person he talked to, penchant for yanking the rug out at the last minute to sweeten the deal for himself, disconnect from facts, history of lies and denials, and avoiding having anything in writing to reduce his odds of going to jail, it’s a wise move by the Speaker. It’s also unlikely to happen.
14
It is high time one of our political parties put its values ahead of political expediency.
If done properly, and I unequivocally trust Nancy Pelosi, the Democrats can turn this into a win-win: True to their values and politically expedient.
82
Why are we changing the name of this agreement?
2
Democrats should pass the deal and claim it as their great bipartisan effort to boost support from American labor. This will help to get the working class to once again support Democrats. Then at the same time, start an advertising campaign blaming Trump for his lousy trade deal that will boost prices for consumers, especially drugs. Take credit for the good effects and blame Trump for the bad ones. That's right out of the Republican playbook.
5
Isn't time to stop pandering?
Isn't time to forget about partisan politics?
Isn't it time to work on what is good for America?
Isn't it time to move forward?
(The election is less than one year away.)
Isn't it time to move past the impeachment fiasco?
Isn't it time to implement policy?
Isn't it time to stop gerrymandering?
Isn't it time to implement legislation?
(After three years, all we as a nation have accomplished is more divisiveness and polarization!)
Isn't it time to move on?
16
@bsb
For the most part I agree, but what aspect of the impeachment inquiry do you consider a fiasco: that trump gets away with not letting all those with direct knowledge of his alleged/presumed high crimes and misdemeanors testify?
Or were you referring to the GOP pit bulls grandstanding, particularly when they realized actually questioning Fiona Hill would be detrimental to their cause of protecting trump no matter what, because the facts are detrimental to said cause?
Or is it because the GOP Senate is not going to impeach trump, full stop?
17
@bsb from ny. You are right. It is high time the nation starts asking the right questions you ask. The questions you are asking have no answers from the party which has created a gridlock and obstructions and will lose congressional majority and will lose the white house and will never get a majority in the senate.
3
@bsb Isn't it time to move past the impeachment fiasco?
Not a "fiasco." It's a crucial, exhausting job, necessitated by our top executive's ignorance of and unwillingness to obey the laws of the land. We need to protect our system of government.
6
The first paragraph of this article is disheartening because it assumes that Democrats care only about politics and making sure that Trump has no successes, rather than governing. The authors project Mitch McConnell's attitude during the Obama Administration onto Congressional Democrats. In fact, Nancy Pelosi has been willing to work with Trump on a number of critical issues, but he changes his position so much that it has been nearly impossible.
My Republican senator has (falsely) accused Democrats of focussing on impeachment to the exclusion of the USMCA. While the news media have spent considerable time on impeachment, as this article reports, negotiations have been proceeding in the background. With all the publicity, it's important to remember that only one committee, and now a second, has conducted impeachment hearings, leaving the remaining committees to pursue other business.
I hope they succeed in reaching a trade deal that will be good for the country. That is what they are paid to do.
One additional comment: To the best of my recollection, NAFTA was originally negotiated by GHW Bush. Clinton inherited it and took it over the finish line.
1
This agreement is a joke on the American worker. This agreement will give safety and environmental requirement that were not in NAFTA. But the sad fact is that the jobs that it will allegedly save or bring back are already gone. There are no provision to protect workers livelihoods when corporation move offshore.
19
“Taken as a whole, it looks more like an agreement that would’ve been negotiated under the Obama administration,” said Senator Rob Portman, Republican of Ohio"
Republicans need to keep Mr. Portman securely in the shadows. The man is a hollow shell of a human, pretty enough for TV but purely ego and entitlement driven, fake as organic KoolAid.
This quote is an excellent example, as Portman stops talking before the crucial point: "In fact, Obama tried to get an even better deal, but we refused to pass anything with his name on it...heh, heh, heh."
2
The Democrats are more interested in harming Trump than in helping America.
Note that the phone call to Zelensky is more important to Democrats than global warming.
4
When the Democrats failed to even consider Trump's DACA plan in exchange for money for the Wall that the Democrats had already supported, I knew they only cared about seeing Trump lose.
And not about their constituents.
This is yet another example of their blind hatred of Trump winning out over helping people.
And when Trump asks: What have the do-nothing Democrats done? The answer will be..... Nothing.....
For many that will be enough to hold their nose and vote for Trump.
Again.
6
It's so interesting that this new trade deal is essentially a progressive trade deal that traditional Republicans have fought against for decades. Watch them, and Trump, fall over each other trying to take credit for this piece of Democratic legislation. And watch all the Trump supporters fall in love with this progressive idea too.
Democrats should get this passed and enjoy participating in the first legislation from this admiinistratipn that actually helps the average American
2
The Democrats should work with the President only because swing state voters are paying attention. It would take the wind out of Trump’s sails when he says Democrats aren’t for the American people.
If the Democrats don’t sign on they will be like the Republicans who were always for infrastructure until Obama wanted it, but rather than give him a political victory they were against it.
2
If labor gets a win, the agreement truly updates NAFTA to the changes resulting from 21st Century commerce standards, and the worst loopholes in NAFTA and the awkwardly named M.C. U.S.A. are closed in agreement with Mexican and Canadian negotiators, then the Democrats should approve it. Trump will tweet he's the winner, but Democrats can brag they made him a winner by making his initial agreement better and Americans are better off because they didn't rush the process. It will likely go down in the McConnell Senate because McConnell, but that's a different problem the Dems can step back from and let the Republicans twist in the wind of their own making.
2
Gee, what would Republicans do in this situation - vote for something they loved for the betterment of their country and hand the Democratic President a win? Or vote against it for raw political reasons?
If you want to help Trump in 2020, vote yes. It’s pretty much that simple. (And we know what Republicans would do - there would be 0 votes in support)
1
The Dems should get on board with the new trade deal and not worry that it gives Trump a win. In fact, it strengthens how they will appear to the American public. It will show that they are not strictly partisan creatures, as virtually every Republican has during the impeachment hearings. Can congress show us that there is still a scintilla of statesmanship available in our politics? Please!
3
The new pact adds jobs and makes more money for workers in all three places. This is not bad.
4
The sad reality is the Trump administration is pushing other countries to buy hormone and antibiotic tainted food and substandard US products like Boeing Jets because the US government under Trump has stripped away US environmental, safety and union protections at home.
The US isn't increasing protections under Trump, its systematically destroy our regulatory system of protection for both the environment and worker rights while negotiating tough new standards for our trading partners.
The Trump administration since day 1 has viewed its job as to decouple the USA from any and all International standards in order to monetize US power.
Changing NAFTA to force higher US content will not increase wages and improve the environment.
1
Let’s be frank. Shaking hands with Trump is asking to have them cut off. I’ve read the article and see the claims about what is in the agreement but with Trump there are no guarantees. He could change it at a whim and leave the Dems with egg on their faces as he has with other hand shakes...remember the dreamers! I’d want to see the document with every jot and tiddle filled in and no detail unresolved.
1
Nixon even while facing tremendous impeachment pressures created the EPA and opened trade with China. It did not make him less of a crook, but it was good for the country.
Democrats can walk and chew gum at the same time. We can see advantages to our nation while impeaching Trump for his obvious behavior. Perhaps this deal is a ploy to take our attention away from Trump's actions, but democrats seek first of all to benefit our country.
If and this is a big this is a good deal that helps workers Congress should pass it. But we should look at it carefully before jumping in with both feet. After this is Trump doing this whelling and dealing.
2
Democrats, tighten up the agreement as best you can and pass this bill. Help fix the mess the Clinton Democrat’s gave us with NAFTA when Bill signed the Bush republicans original trade agreement. Trump gets credit? Yeah & anti working class republicans have to vote for or against Trump & the Democrats new & improved NAFTA. Time for free trade to mean fair trade & being a Democrat means supporting the working class “again” like before the Clintons threw us under the bus. Oh & keep right on impeaching the twitter troll while your at it. Make it a two for, see if Trump really means to pass this thing.
3
The headline and approach of this article are manipulative and inflammatory: “steal”; “from the Democrats”; “Should they hand President Trump a victory.” You don’t want to characterize the bipartisan work being done. It is and does—just as so-called Obamacare uses a lot of the Republican healthcare “playbook.”
New York Times, be more nuanced and stop characterizing simply “Democratic opposition.” The Democratic Party is NOT doing nothing.
3
Democrats - be the bigger party on this.
2
Revised NAFTA will pass only if the labor and dispute resolution provisions reflect progressive values. After almost 70 years of anti-labor policies (beginning with Taft-Hartley), this would be the first significant pro-labor policy to become law during my lifetime. It is long overdue and it is just the beginning.
10
@OldBoatMan
With you, OldBoatMan.
My sources tell me Lighthizer hasn't said much but has given all the appearance of listening the the House committees he's met with for the last half year or so.
Some here suggest cursed politics should be kept out of the Democrats' calculations but that will never happen, nor do I see how it could, particularly in our now-perpetual campaign season.
I'm hoping it comes down to a Democratic Party stong enough to hold out for the kinds of reforms that Lori Wallach of Public Citizen is demanding on workers' and consumers' behalf, and if Trump is desperate enough for a "win," this might be the right time to exact an appropriate price for collaborating with the enemy.
If Democrats succeed at that, pulling Big Pharma's teeth and adding stiff enforcement provisions where they are missing, for two instances, they will have earned bragging rights and can exercise them for the whole of 2020.
1
Well the question is whether politics triumph over what's best for the nation. neither party seems to understand the priority.
12
Truman wisely said "It is amazing what you can accomplish if you do not care who gets the credit". He certainly knew that credit matters but he also accomplished a lot. This article makes it seem that the Democrats, if they can correct a few sticking points, might accomplish a lot if they are willing to give a little credit to someone who deserves less.
18
@Reuel
Yes sign Trump's NAFTA bill, but then give credit where credit is due, the Left, including Bernie Sanders, who have been fighting for this for 25 years against Republicans and centrist Democrats.
@Reuel
It's the other way around. Pelosi has been pushing for labor and environmental protections. To get a deal, the Trump administration has to agree to include them, and to include effective enforcement provisions,
Democrats should remember who they are as a party. Support of the rights of labor and protecting the environment are core principles of the Democratic Party.
Labor and environmental protections are essential to passing this bill. Despite the claims of the supporters of the president that "he is not a politician," this president will not do anything unless it helps him politically with his base.
Republicans have made their opposition to unions and environmental protection clear. Democratic Reps should insist on revisions to this proposed trade agreement and vote for it if the agreement is amended.
This is not about "handing the president a victory." Democrats should do what is right for the worker and the environment. We know that Republicans will not voluntarily do anything that helps the working person, particularly union workers.
If the president wants a trade deal, he must compromise and agree to changes that benefit those that he claims to represent.
13
The complexity of the whole "trade" concept is swept under the rug by this article and frankly, the whole debate.
Trade, healthy developing economies and immigration are all tied together. Earth to immigration hawks: a strong Mexican or Honduran economy that offers good jobs making products or services to export reduces the need or even desire to emigrate.
Take it a step further. If we thought about the big picture, we should be fostering the building of factories in countries like Honduras that are suffering. That would require our government to actually HELP those nations deal with their crime and corruption problems while offering jobs. People would want to stay home, work and prosper.
To the degree that this new trade "deal" addresses any of that, great. "Protections" in isolation are just barriers to greater goals.
And...outsourcing of jobs is a real source of job loss in this country. But it is tiny compared to the impact of automation and AI. Trump and his commerce advisers are living in the 20th century.
22
@Bob Bruce Anderson
Earth to Americans: Stop invading other countries if you want them to develop on democratic paths. Obama and Hillary Clinton overthrew the governments of Honduras and Libya, now major exporters of desperate migrants.
Stopping our disastrous interventions (back to the US overthrow of the democratic governments of Iran and Guatemala) would have been far more beneficial to developing countries than NAFTA and getting China into the WTO (both Bill Clinton's projects).
We worry about strengthening Mexican trade unions while the Trump Labor Board weakens U.S. unions. Should U.S. labor really get behind it?
14
@larry cary I agree. At times I believe the leadership and members of the unions are easily bought with shiny baubles and fooled equally as easily.
@larry cary hardly strengthens Mexican unions, they are shams.
I suggest every product made overseas, especially cars, should be required to be named something typically associated with that country’s culture.
They chevy Nova was a classic, it translates to NoGo in Spanish.
As can be expected, the NYtimes is presenting this incorrectly. The new trade agreement negotiated by the Trump administration, with no input from democrats, appears to provide some advantages to the United States over the old NAFTA, and if the democratic congress operated according to their oath to holding office, would approve it quickly. Instead, they do not want to grant trump an accomplishment and are tying it up with poison pills. Good job democrats. Luckily for the democrats, the news media is covering up their corruption. And this is clearly reflects corrupt acts by the democrats. Any trade agreement with the Chinese will have a a similar problem, and the Chinese know it.
25
@sh
I agree with the part where you didn’t capitalize “trump”.
11
@sh Thanks. I needed a good laugh with my morning coffee.
6
@sh FYI, more Republicans voted for the original NAFTA than Democrats.
10
Another example of “make the perfect the enemy of the good”. Yes, Trump will strut and crow - but he would do that anyway. So Nancy, get what you can and pass the buck to Mitch to deal with it.
95
@Rich M
Your missing an important element. Take credit for making it happen. Trump stole these policies from the Left and Bernie.
Don't give the credit to Trump. Give the credit where the credit is due.
1
Democrats will ultimately bail on the environmental protection and labor provisions and hand Trump an election year victory.
7
The article is long on chatter and short on details.
How does the new trade agreement differ from the old without the partisan commentary? How is the agreement good for us, without using partisan language to define the terms? Can we gat an actual analysis of the benefits and risks?
Is the deal good for someone who isn't democrat or republican?
McConnel might argue that that a president shouldn't be making these kinds of decisions in an election year. Explain the deal in simple terms and let the people decide in the next election.
69
@Zeke27
Spot on. It is past time to recognize that most of us are neither Democrats or Republicans. That plurality will eventually become a majority as the case for voting for either one of the two moribund political entities fades. This debate over this trade agreement shines a light on how dysfunctional our government is despite an opportunity to clear legislation that most voters can support regardless of party registration.
4
@Zeke27
I thought the same things while I was reading it. I kept skipping through the political analysis to find the actual details of the Bill.
The NY Times is becoming more like the NY Post, telling us what to think about the information, instead of giving us the information. Hooves is the details so we can make our own decisions about what we think.
6
Excellent article. Is it possible for the Agreement which has managed to, for the most part, satisfy both parties, to be passed by Congress? Will our politicians move beyond the partisan infighting to pass meaningful legislation? America needs to see our Government come together in the best interests of our Country. The Agreement appears to meet that objective, and it’s time to do the right thing.
10
Excellent article.
1
Nafta began the destruction of US manufacturing, as Ross Perot predicted it would. China joining the World Trade Organization expanded it.
If this revised agreement can help American workers, that's a win regardless of party.
And the party that holds it up will lose in 2020.
145
@Talbot Nope, that's not what happened. The rise of China, automation, and the general rise of world trade accounted for a much greater percentage of job losses.
16
@Talbot
Am I right to assume that your cell phone, computer, TV, kitchen appliances, children’s toys, etc etc etc are not made in China, given your concern for US manufacturing?
12
@Talbot Perfect. Now, if Trump doesn't agree to the worker and environmental protections, it will still be the Democrats' fault. Nice work.
10