This Senator Bernie Sanders floor speech clip says it all. He's quoting the head of Obama's "job creation team", who love China as the top offshore outsourcing manufacturing destination after passing the mother of all bad trade deals, the China PNTR.
I link to the roll call votes so we don't have to clutter up the site with that database tallies. That said, look at the Democrats on the list who claim to be "for the middle class". Their constituents are: WA: Microsoft, Boeing, AK: Wal-mart, OR: Intel, CA: Cisco, G.E.,IL: Caterpillar (Iowa as well);
You can see who the bought and paid fors are by campaign contributions, "favors" for their family relatives, magically they get hired at some company and so on, revolving door, where they get their money after they "retire" or before they got into politics....
The reason that Senator Coburn did not vote on the FTAs or on the China currency bill is that he is in Oklahoma, recuperating from prostate cancer surgery.
I don't know if anyone cares but Dennis Ritchie invented "C", the most successful programming language to date and upon which most modern software was built. He also worked on Unix development, which was a team invention, all of this when he was at Bell Labs.
Here's also a great example of the kind of contribution corporations used to do and should do today. AT&T ran Bell Labs, a prestigious research division and a host of inventions, innovations originated from Bell Labs and brought in the modern communications era, cell phones, Unix, programming, audio compression, list goes on and on.
He's actually more important in terms of contributions than Steve Jobs in many ways, but only people who are geeks have ever heard of him.
I was thinking of this, why is it economists get Nobel prizes but not engineers? Engineers, the actual inventors really should be more public acknowledgment.
RECENT VOTES ON FTAs in the U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Representatives who "never saw a FTA they didn't like" -- In this category, there are 26 Democrats and 213 Republicans (including Micelle Bachman)! Yes, that's correct more than 88% of Republican representatives are flat out anti-American on trade! (As are about 13.5% of Democrats.)
If that isn't disturbing enough, the count of Republicans who voted against all three FTAs is exactly ... 2! Those two are David McKinley (WV - 1) and Chris Smith (NJ - 4). McKinley is the only Tea Party freshman (first elected in 2010) who voted against all three FTAs. Smith has been in Congress since 1981 and is dean of the New Jersey Congressional delegation.
(Maybe I have missed in my count ... please ... someone correct me! I hope there are more than just the two Republicans opposed to the FTAs!)
Well, Ron Paul did not vote on any of the FTAs -- and he is a declared opponent of the WTO system, although in the next breath, he tells us that he wants the U.S. to unilaterally drop all tariffs! (So who needs a WTO to unilaterally surrender to China? This is like Paul's opposition to the Fed, and then we just go over immediately to gold! Here again, someone correct me ... PLEASE!)
Honor Roll
As noted above, there appear to be just two Republicans who voted against all three of the FTAs. As for the Democrats, there appear to be 118 who deserve to be on the Honor Roll, 118 Democrats who support the American people (against the FTA agenda), demonstrating that by voting against all three of the FTAs. That's 61% of all Democrats. Democratic leaders Pelosi and Hoyer, of course, cannot be found among that 61%!
Support from Democrats for any of the FTAs was greatest for the Panama FTA and least for the Columbia FTA. About 10 Democrats voted for only one of the FTAs (voting against two of them), and of those 10, about 7 broke with the majority of Democrats to vote for the Korea deal.
Three Democrats did not vote in any of the three roll calls (apparently not present), as also was the case for Republican Ron Paul.
Here are the totals for the three roll calls, per clerk.house.gov (roll call #s 781, 782, 783) --
Vote on United States-Columbia Trade Agreement (Roll Call 781)
Ayes
Nays
Present
NV
Republican
231
9
1
Democratic
31
158
3
Total
252
167
4
Vote on Panama Trade Agreement (Roll Call 782)
Ayes
Nays
Present
NV
Republican
234
6
1
Democratic
66
123
3
Total
300
129
4
Vote on United States-Korea Trade Agreement (Roll Call 783)
Ayes
Nays
Present
NV
Republican
219
21
1
Democratic
59
130
3
Total
278
151
4
Here's the Honor Roll (those who voted against all three FTAs), with the two Republicans in bold --
Altmire
Andrews
Baca
Baldwin
Barrow
Bass (CA)
Berkley
Bishop (NY)
Boswell
Brady (PA)
Braley (IA)
Brown (FL)
Butterfield
Capps
Capuano
Carnahan
Carson (IN)
Chu
Cicilline
Clarke (MI)
Clarke (NY)
Clay
Cleaver
Cohen
Conyers
Costello
Courtney
Critz
Cummings
DeFazio
DeLauro
Deutch
Dingell
Donnelly (IN)
Doyle
Edwards
Ellison
Filner
Frank (MA)
Fudge
Garamendi
Green, Al
Green, Gene
Grijalva
Gutierrez
Hahn
Hastings (FL)
Heinrich
Higgins
Hinchey
Hirono
Hochul
Holden
Holt
Honda
Israel
Jackson (IL)
Jackson Lee (TX)
Johnson (GA)
Kaptur
Keating
Kildee
Kissell
Kucinich
Langevin
Lee (CA)
Lewis (GA)
Lipinski
Loebsack
Lofgren, Zoe
Luján
Lynch
Markey
McCollum
McGovern
McIntyre McKinley
McNerney
Michaud
Miller (NC)
Miller, George
Moore
Murphy (CT)
Nadler
Napolitano
Ruppersberger
Rush
Ryan (OH)
Sánchez, Linda T.
Sarbanes
Schakowsky
Serrano
Sherman
Shuler Smith (NJ)
Speier
Stark
Sutton
Thompson (MS)
Tierney
Tonko
Towns
Velázquez
Visclosky
Waters
Watt
Woolsey
Yarmuth
There may be an inaccuracy here and there in the information from the House -- for example, the clerk.house.gov shows a "Watt (MN)" voting on one Roll Call, even though the only Watt in the House is Mel Watt of North Carolina and there is no Rep. Watt from Minnesota.
From Market Ticker's post on how free trade is destroying Americans ...
Click here to read it (http://market-ticker.org/akcs-www?post=195906)
We are constantly told how "free trade" is good for America, and how it boosts our exports (and thus helps GDP - and employment.) The truth is something else entirely. Indeed, at this point one can no longer claim this is a "mistake"; it's an intentional fraud that is pushed by multinational corporations and the politicians in their pockets. "
Sometimes it hurts to grow older. I can remember when the Republican Party was the party of tariffs and protectionism! Well, all we can say now about that Grand Old Party is 'Rest In Peace', because it's dead and long gone. The same is true for most of what was once real unbiased major TV news coverage (including NPR).
Vast Majority of Dems Abandon President, and Media Misses It
It's typically treated as pretty newsworthy when a majority of a president's own party votes against a signature presidential initiative. Double that when over two-thirds do so. Triple the newsworthiness when it's the first time that magnitude of opposition has occured in a president's tenure.
Quadruple for when talking heads are debating whether elected officials will carry the banner of a wide-ranging new progressive protest movement that has declared its independence from that same president. And quintuple when the president has presented a two-plank carrot-stick deal with Republicans - controversial trade deals that won't create jobs plus stimulus spending that will - and when the Republicans move forward with the job-killing plank. But the job-creating plank? Not so much.
This describes precisely what happened with last night's votes to expand NAFTA-style deals to Korea, Colombia and Panama. But you wouldn't know it from any of this morning's press coverage of the vote, which lauded the "bipartisanship" of a deal that was supported by only a tiny cohort of corporate Democrats.
We do politics, absolutely and strong "Populist rants" (if you notice I have been pounding on trade, China currency manipulation the past two weeks because of the bills in Congress) are more than allowed.
Of course real live statistics have to be behind those "Populist rants", that's key. If you're using a think tank's research, make sure it's not spin and statistical valid, else, be prepared to be censored. ;) Believe me, I read every EPI reference, Public citizen reference and so on to make sure I'm not using someone's personal spin machine and number puke instead of statistically valid research data.
You really have to be careful using economics research, good god, the spin is so thick it's made it to the hard sciences. Very depressing for anyone familiar with scientific methods.
My disgust and disdain this week boiled over and one would think my disgust sensors would be completely burnt out, there has been so much beyond belief outrageous bills via Congress and administrations, clearly out to screw over the U.S. middle class, U.S. workers, American citizens to no end....
The good news if there is one, is the number of Democrats who broke with "party" to vote against these trade agreements. We should watch their campaign coffers drop accordingly along with any jobs and book deals for themselves and their family members, friends, alliances too.
Why that all is isn't called corrupt and illegal is another question. s
DISCLAIMER: Economic Populist (EP) is dedicated to objective reporting on the economy from a macro-economics point of view, and generally avoids the usual political discussions. My intent here is to summarize recent pro-FTA activity in the Senate as objectively as possible; however, my own political views will probably show through. My opinions can be fairly described as anti-WTO and anti-FTA, and may or may not represent the views of EP or of bloggers at EP.
The first name on the list is President Obama. He has never seen a FTA he doesn't like. This is very nearly true of the entire Republican Party also -- which leaves us pro-America voters splitting the ticket, and/or voting for alternative party candidates, in 2012.
Maybe there's no real vote count at least in some states, but if there is anything like that, we're taking names and we will remember.
U.S. SENATE
Honor Roll
Here's the Honor Roll for the Senate, 12 senators who support the American people (against the FTA agenda), demonstrating that by voting against all three of the FTAs:
All are Democrats; not one Republican voted against all three FTAs. There's a message in there somewhere, saying something about the party that was once known as the tariff party (for over 100 years)!
THE UNIQUE CASE OF SENATOR TOM COBURN (R-OK)
Senator Coburn (R-OK) is recorded as not voting (NV) on any of the three FTAs as well as NV on S. 1619 (currency bill). However, when in the House, Coburn voted YES on withdrawing from the WTO and NO on fast-track authority!
It is my belief we must never surrender our sovereignty to the World Trade Organization (WTO) or any other unelected international bureaucracy. The WTO has become a vehicle for other nations to destroy our agricultural trade, and as your senator I will fight any effort by the WTO to dictate American farm policy.
Honorable Mention
Here's the list of runners-up, 11 senators who support the American people (against the FTA agenda) two times out of three:
It's unclear to me why Sanders did not vote on the Korea FTA (recorded as not voting or 'NV').
The Usual Suspects
Here's the list of 12 senators who at least could manage to vote against the FTAs one out of three times, but also voted for the FTAs two times out of three:
In the Senate, the greatest opposition was to the Columbia FTA, for many good reasons -- violent repression of labor organizers, money-laundering and implications for illegal drug trade.
The greatest support was shown for the Korea FTA. Of the 15 Nay votes against the Korea FTA, there is only one Republican, Senator Olympia Snowe of Maine. Senators Coburn (R-OK) and Sanders (I-VT) were recorded as not voting, although both are known for their anti-fast track and anti-WTO positions.
SUMMARY
We can summarize briefly, as follows:
FORGET THE GOP EXCEPT FOR THE MAVERICKS. The only Republican senators who are not allied with Obama in never seeing a FTA that they didn't like are Coburn, Collins and Snowe. Coburn takes a clear anti-WTO position in general. Collins and Snowe are known as the last of the "liberal Republicans" in the Senate. None of the three can be much appreciated by the Republican National Committee -- nor do any of them owe anything to the RNC.
THE 18 DEMPUBLICANS. 33 out of the 51 senators who caucus with the Democratic majority opposed at least one of the three FTAs. But there are 18 who never saw a FTA they didn't like. These Dempublicans are the senators that the Republicans can count on to join with them on such issues as trade. Here's a list of the 18 Dempublican senators --
Baucus (MT), Bingaman (NM), Cantwell (WA), Carper (DE), Conrad (ND), Feinstein (CA), Johnson (SD), Kerry (MA), Landrieu (LA), Lieberman (CT), Murray (WA), Nelson (NE), Nelson (FL), Pryor (AR), Shaheen (NH), Warner (VA), Webb (VA), Wyden (OR).
Some of these senators have earlier taken positions against fast-track authority and critical of the WTO system. Tim Johnson (SD), in particular, voted against NAFTA and CAFTA. Senator Conrad (ND) has expressed similar criticism of FTAs from the point of view of agriculture.
A few of the Dempublican senators who never saw a FTA they didn't like are going to be up for re-election in 2012, unless they decide not to run. These include Bingaman, Cantwell, Conrad, Feinstein, Lieberman, and Nelson (FL) -- all known for their positions in favor of 'free' trade (fast track) FTAs.
Webb's Senate seat (VA) is coming up for election in 2012, but he has announced that he won't be running.
Senators identified on the Honor Roll or as Honorable Mention who are scheduled for 2012 elections include Brown, Cardin, Casey, Sanders, Stabenow, Tester, and, Whitehouse.
Senators Coburn and Sanders -- although coming from very different philosophical positions -- are the best in terms of telling it like it is regarding trade issues. Coburn, re-elected in 2010, has announced that he will not be running for a third term in the Senate in 2016. (Sanders' seat is up for election in 2012.)
______
In the next few days, I will probably be posting a comment summarizing activity in the House.
I'm fairly convinced the U.S. Chamber of Commerce does a lot of "article" plants as well as others. Either regurgitated lobbyists' talking points or spin.
We get requests for article plants, i.e. someone wants to write an "article" that's either an agenda or glorified ad and post it here. I'm sure the larger media outlets sites get paid for doing something similar.
BTW: That's refused, we won't take those "plant" stories or anything that isn't clearly marked "ad" when it is one.
Trade deficit article overview coming soon. Look to the left column for it.
We're an independent site, but we do math here. It's unbelievable how the main stream press doesn't report the actual details of these trade agreements, or the projected job losses.
If you go into Google News, Yahoo, you'll see over 6000 articles and in the U.S. all of them are superficial "yeah rah". Not a single trade treaty fact, from even one agreement, or a quote from just one politician who might have actually read them, or even a look at the U.S. own analysis that these will lose jobs, increase the trade deficit, in the lot.
This is common when it comes to multinational corporation's wish list agendas to see "article plants".
Yesterday the Gray Lady reported the horror of imports slowing down, today confirmed with the very slight drop in the trade deficit. Throughout the analysis, a one-to-one relationship was set up between consumer holiday demand and the volume of imports:
"
“We’re concerned, because usually at this time, you see this peak,” said Richard D. Steinke, the executive director of the Port of Long Beach in California. “We haven’t seen it."
In fact, the five busiest container ports in the United States said that imports in August 2011 were lower than or even with 2010 volumes. In Long Beach, the second-busiest container port by volume, August imports fell by 14.2 percent from August 2010. While the port has not yet released September volumes, a spokesman, Art Wong, said it expected about a 15 percent drop from September 2010. "
What is fascinating, is that there is absolutely no mention of demand for holiday shopping coming from domestically produced sources. In fact NYT does not even attempt to rule out the possibility, of a slight statistical wobble from domestic buying of domestic goods for the holidays. Science is all about controlling your variables and laying out the effect of each variable. If the effect of a variable like domestic demand, is slight, say so statistically.
So we assume as a macro-economy that we do not produce anything domestically for holidays whichy so many celebrate for religious reasons. You have to wonder what they worship. This analysis by NYT is the best argument anyone can dream up against the fantasy of the FTAs helping anyone but the MNCs.
Goldman Sachs is an exceptionally well capitalized Bank by Basel II Standards. GS primary ration is 18.8% and total capital ratio is 23.9%. The ECB today is hoping to get the Euro sector up to 9% primary capital. But look closer at GS.
Total Revenue is almost $40Bn and Expense is $19Bn on 12/31/2010. All compensation is $9Bn. Executive Comp is the lion's share. Of 585Million Common Shares authorized, the restricted stock plans hold 60 million shares, and 231 Million shares are held in treasury. So over the last 4 years, GS has issued 11% of its common shares to executive comp plans or $8.4 Billion.
This number is set against total assets of $911 Million and Equity of $77 Million. So paying out sums like this is a big deal. GS turnover is 40 times its assets. All the action these days is in its derivative portfolio of of $20Billion. Now according the NYTimes on Friday, GS is heading for a loss. This time who is the Uncle Warren to buy some more preferred shares?
Most important, how would GS or any bank more poorly capitalized, issue more common equity when it's executives have taken such a huge share already? The Euro sector banks have similar compensation but much poorer capital ratios. Dodd-Frank has restricted use of bailouts.
All things economic are about choice. You can't do it all at one time. The banks cannot do profligate executive compensation and also recapitalize with more equity. The failure to bring up capital ratios effects macro economies and executive compensation is in the way of better capital rations.
This article focused on STEM labor arbitrage because the real statistics rarely make it to the press, and the data to debunk the "labor arbitraging Americans creates jobs" mantra is harder to find. Anyone who is in the STEM fields knows MNCs and others are kicking techies to the labor curb, including advanced researchers.
That said, the "report", has a slew of MNC/corporate wish lists, which others are writing up, such as a tax holiday to bring back their offshore outsourced profits to the U.S. tax free. That's another bold faced lie, these corporations are already sitting on a horde of cash and will not invest in America, hire Americans pretty much. There has been a little movement from Intel for U.S. based FABS, but in terms of hiring U.S. citizens, they simply refuse, esp. if they are older.
There is much more to their demands, bottom line a tax holiday will not create jobs for Americans, it's just another corporate welfare gift.
I think the most odious thing of all is now we have corporate lobbyist demands being issued as a White House report. And they wonder why people have taken to Occupy Wall Street (well, they don't wonder, these corporate PR people just hope you don't figure that out).
This Senator Bernie Sanders floor speech clip says it all. He's quoting the head of Obama's "job creation team", who love China as the top offshore outsourcing manufacturing destination after passing the mother of all bad trade deals, the China PNTR.
I link to the roll call votes so we don't have to clutter up the site with that database tallies. That said, look at the Democrats on the list who claim to be "for the middle class". Their constituents are: WA: Microsoft, Boeing, AK: Wal-mart, OR: Intel, CA: Cisco, G.E.,IL: Caterpillar (Iowa as well);
You can see who the bought and paid fors are by campaign contributions, "favors" for their family relatives, magically they get hired at some company and so on, revolving door, where they get their money after they "retire" or before they got into politics....
It's pathetic.
The reason that Senator Coburn did not vote on the FTAs or on the China currency bill is that he is in Oklahoma, recuperating from prostate cancer surgery.
"why is it economists get Nobel prizes but not engineers? Engineers, the actual inventors really should be more public acknowledgment."
Great idea.
Cannot trade deficits also result in transfer of ownership of productive capacity and real estate from U.S. citizens/residents to foreign interests?
Here's the live link -- market-ticker post 'Intentional fraud that is pushed by multinational corporations'
I don't know why the MSM can't grasp imports subtract from economic growth. I think they are corrupted.
the ever widening trade deficit should be all the evidence one needs that free trade does not contribute to GDP
the trade defict is the measure of jobs, technology and wealth leaving the country
I don't know if anyone cares but Dennis Ritchie invented "C", the most successful programming language to date and upon which most modern software was built. He also worked on Unix development, which was a team invention, all of this when he was at Bell Labs.
Here's also a great example of the kind of contribution corporations used to do and should do today. AT&T ran Bell Labs, a prestigious research division and a host of inventions, innovations originated from Bell Labs and brought in the modern communications era, cell phones, Unix, programming, audio compression, list goes on and on.
He's actually more important in terms of contributions than Steve Jobs in many ways, but only people who are geeks have ever heard of him.
I was thinking of this, why is it economists get Nobel prizes but not engineers? Engineers, the actual inventors really should be more public acknowledgment.
RECENT VOTES ON FTAs in the U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Representatives who "never saw a FTA they didn't like" -- In this category, there are 26 Democrats and 213 Republicans (including Micelle Bachman)! Yes, that's correct more than 88% of Republican representatives are flat out anti-American on trade! (As are about 13.5% of Democrats.)
If that isn't disturbing enough, the count of Republicans who voted against all three FTAs is exactly ... 2! Those two are David McKinley (WV - 1) and Chris Smith (NJ - 4). McKinley is the only Tea Party freshman (first elected in 2010) who voted against all three FTAs. Smith has been in Congress since 1981 and is dean of the New Jersey Congressional delegation.
(Maybe I have missed in my count ... please ... someone correct me! I hope there are more than just the two Republicans opposed to the FTAs!)
Well, Ron Paul did not vote on any of the FTAs -- and he is a declared opponent of the WTO system, although in the next breath, he tells us that he wants the U.S. to unilaterally drop all tariffs! (So who needs a WTO to unilaterally surrender to China? This is like Paul's opposition to the Fed, and then we just go over immediately to gold! Here again, someone correct me ... PLEASE!)
Honor Roll
As noted above, there appear to be just two Republicans who voted against all three of the FTAs. As for the Democrats, there appear to be 118 who deserve to be on the Honor Roll, 118 Democrats who support the American people (against the FTA agenda), demonstrating that by voting against all three of the FTAs. That's 61% of all Democrats. Democratic leaders Pelosi and Hoyer, of course, cannot be found among that 61%!
Support from Democrats for any of the FTAs was greatest for the Panama FTA and least for the Columbia FTA. About 10 Democrats voted for only one of the FTAs (voting against two of them), and of those 10, about 7 broke with the majority of Democrats to vote for the Korea deal.
Three Democrats did not vote in any of the three roll calls (apparently not present), as also was the case for Republican Ron Paul.
Here are the totals for the three roll calls, per clerk.house.gov (roll call #s 781, 782, 783) --
Here's the Honor Roll (those who voted against all three FTAs), with the two Republicans in bold --
Altmire
Andrews
Baca
Baldwin
Barrow
Bass (CA)
Berkley
Bishop (NY)
Boswell
Brady (PA)
Braley (IA)
Brown (FL)
Butterfield
Capps
Capuano
Carnahan
Carson (IN)
Chu
Cicilline
Clarke (MI)
Clarke (NY)
Clay
Cleaver
Cohen
Conyers
Costello
Courtney
Critz
Cummings
DeFazio
DeLauro
Deutch
Dingell
Donnelly (IN)
Doyle
Edwards
Ellison
Filner
Frank (MA)
Fudge
Garamendi
Green, Al
Green, Gene
Grijalva
Gutierrez
Hahn
Hastings (FL)
Heinrich
Higgins
Hinchey
Hirono
Hochul
Holden
Holt
Honda
Israel
Jackson (IL)
Jackson Lee (TX)
Johnson (GA)
Kaptur
Keating
Kildee
Kissell
Kucinich
Langevin
Lee (CA)
Lewis (GA)
Lipinski
Loebsack
Lofgren, Zoe
Luján
Lynch
Markey
McCollum
McGovern
McIntyre
McKinley
McNerney
Michaud
Miller (NC)
Miller, George
Moore
Murphy (CT)
Nadler
Napolitano
Pallone
Pastor (AZ)
Payne
Perlmutter
Peters
Pingree (ME)
Rahall
Reyes
Richardson
Roybal-Allard
Ruppersberger
Rush
Ryan (OH)
Sánchez, Linda T.
Sarbanes
Schakowsky
Serrano
Sherman
Shuler
Smith (NJ)
Speier
Stark
Sutton
Thompson (MS)
Tierney
Tonko
Towns
Velázquez
Visclosky
Waters
Watt
Woolsey
Yarmuth
There may be an inaccuracy here and there in the information from the House -- for example, the clerk.house.gov shows a "Watt (MN)" voting on one Roll Call, even though the only Watt in the House is Mel Watt of North Carolina and there is no Rep. Watt from Minnesota.
From Market Ticker's post on how free trade is destroying Americans ...
Click here to read it (http://market-ticker.org/akcs-www?post=195906)
We are constantly told how "free trade" is good for America, and how it boosts our exports (and thus helps GDP - and employment.)
The truth is something else entirely. Indeed, at this point one can no longer claim this is a "mistake"; it's an intentional fraud that is pushed by multinational corporations and the politicians in their pockets. "
Sometimes it hurts to grow older. I can remember when the Republican Party was the party of tariffs and protectionism! Well, all we can say now about that Grand Old Party is 'Rest In Peace', because it's dead and long gone. The same is true for most of what was once real unbiased major TV news coverage (including NPR).
Here's from current EP-linked Eyes on Trade (Public Citizen's blog on trade and globalization) --
We do politics, absolutely and strong "Populist rants" (if you notice I have been pounding on trade, China currency manipulation the past two weeks because of the bills in Congress) are more than allowed.
Of course real live statistics have to be behind those "Populist rants", that's key. If you're using a think tank's research, make sure it's not spin and statistical valid, else, be prepared to be censored. ;) Believe me, I read every EPI reference, Public citizen reference and so on to make sure I'm not using someone's personal spin machine and number puke instead of statistically valid research data.
You really have to be careful using economics research, good god, the spin is so thick it's made it to the hard sciences. Very depressing for anyone familiar with scientific methods.
My disgust and disdain this week boiled over and one would think my disgust sensors would be completely burnt out, there has been so much beyond belief outrageous bills via Congress and administrations, clearly out to screw over the U.S. middle class, U.S. workers, American citizens to no end....
The good news if there is one, is the number of Democrats who broke with "party" to vote against these trade agreements. We should watch their campaign coffers drop accordingly along with any jobs and book deals for themselves and their family members, friends, alliances too.
Why that all is isn't called corrupt and illegal is another question. s
DISCLAIMER: Economic Populist (EP) is dedicated to objective reporting on the economy from a macro-economics point of view, and generally avoids the usual political discussions. My intent here is to summarize recent pro-FTA activity in the Senate as objectively as possible; however, my own political views will probably show through. My opinions can be fairly described as anti-WTO and anti-FTA, and may or may not represent the views of EP or of bloggers at EP.
The first name on the list is President Obama. He has never seen a FTA he doesn't like. This is very nearly true of the entire Republican Party also -- which leaves us pro-America voters splitting the ticket, and/or voting for alternative party candidates, in 2012.
Maybe there's no real vote count at least in some states, but if there is anything like that, we're taking names and we will remember.
U.S. SENATE
Honor Roll
Here's the Honor Roll for the Senate, 12 senators who support the American people (against the FTA agenda), demonstrating that by voting against all three of the FTAs:
Blumenthal (CT), Brown (OH), Casey (PA), Hagan (NC), Harkin (IA), Manchin (WV, Merkley (OR), Reed (RI), Reid (NV), Rockefeller (WV), Tester (MT), Whitehouse (RI).
All are Democrats; not one Republican voted against all three FTAs. There's a message in there somewhere, saying something about the party that was once known as the tariff party (for over 100 years)!
THE UNIQUE CASE OF SENATOR TOM COBURN (R-OK)
Senator Coburn (R-OK) is recorded as not voting (NV) on any of the three FTAs as well as NV on S. 1619 (currency bill). However, when in the House, Coburn voted YES on withdrawing from the WTO and NO on fast-track authority!
From Senator Coburn's official senate.gov webpage --
Honorable Mention
Here's the list of runners-up, 11 senators who support the American people (against the FTA agenda) two times out of three:
Akaka (HI), Begich (AK), Boxer (CA), Cardin (MC), Franken (MN), Gillibrand (NY), Mikulski (MD), Sanders (VT), Snowe (ME), Stabemow (MI), Udall (NM).
It's unclear to me why Sanders did not vote on the Korea FTA (recorded as not voting or 'NV').
The Usual Suspects
Here's the list of 12 senators who at least could manage to vote against the FTAs one out of three times, but also voted for the FTAs two times out of three:
Collins (ME), Coons (DE), Durbin (IL), Leahy (VT), Inouye (HI), Klobuchar (MN), Kohl (WI), Lautenberg (NJ), Levin (MI), McCaskill (MO), Menendez (NJ), Schumer (NY),
In the Senate, the greatest opposition was to the Columbia FTA, for many good reasons -- violent repression of labor organizers, money-laundering and implications for illegal drug trade.
The greatest support was shown for the Korea FTA. Of the 15 Nay votes against the Korea FTA, there is only one Republican, Senator Olympia Snowe of Maine. Senators Coburn (R-OK) and Sanders (I-VT) were recorded as not voting, although both are known for their anti-fast track and anti-WTO positions.
SUMMARY
We can summarize briefly, as follows:
FORGET THE GOP EXCEPT FOR THE MAVERICKS. The only Republican senators who are not allied with Obama in never seeing a FTA that they didn't like are Coburn, Collins and Snowe. Coburn takes a clear anti-WTO position in general. Collins and Snowe are known as the last of the "liberal Republicans" in the Senate. None of the three can be much appreciated by the Republican National Committee -- nor do any of them owe anything to the RNC.
THE 18 DEMPUBLICANS. 33 out of the 51 senators who caucus with the Democratic majority opposed at least one of the three FTAs. But there are 18 who never saw a FTA they didn't like. These Dempublicans are the senators that the Republicans can count on to join with them on such issues as trade. Here's a list of the 18 Dempublican senators --
Baucus (MT), Bingaman (NM), Cantwell (WA), Carper (DE), Conrad (ND), Feinstein (CA), Johnson (SD), Kerry (MA), Landrieu (LA), Lieberman (CT), Murray (WA), Nelson (NE), Nelson (FL), Pryor (AR), Shaheen (NH), Warner (VA), Webb (VA), Wyden (OR).
Some of these senators have earlier taken positions against fast-track authority and critical of the WTO system. Tim Johnson (SD), in particular, voted against NAFTA and CAFTA. Senator Conrad (ND) has expressed similar criticism of FTAs from the point of view of agriculture.
A few of the Dempublican senators who never saw a FTA they didn't like are going to be up for re-election in 2012, unless they decide not to run. These include Bingaman, Cantwell, Conrad, Feinstein, Lieberman, and Nelson (FL) -- all known for their positions in favor of 'free' trade (fast track) FTAs.
Webb's Senate seat (VA) is coming up for election in 2012, but he has announced that he won't be running.
Senators identified on the Honor Roll or as Honorable Mention who are scheduled for 2012 elections include Brown, Cardin, Casey, Sanders, Stabenow, Tester, and, Whitehouse.
Senators Coburn and Sanders -- although coming from very different philosophical positions -- are the best in terms of telling it like it is regarding trade issues. Coburn, re-elected in 2010, has announced that he will not be running for a third term in the Senate in 2016. (Sanders' seat is up for election in 2012.)
______
In the next few days, I will probably be posting a comment summarizing activity in the House.
I'm fairly convinced the U.S. Chamber of Commerce does a lot of "article" plants as well as others. Either regurgitated lobbyists' talking points or spin.
We get requests for article plants, i.e. someone wants to write an "article" that's either an agenda or glorified ad and post it here. I'm sure the larger media outlets sites get paid for doing something similar.
BTW: That's refused, we won't take those "plant" stories or anything that isn't clearly marked "ad" when it is one.
Trade deficit article overview coming soon. Look to the left column for it.
This piece was linked by the Teamsters.
We're an independent site, but we do math here. It's unbelievable how the main stream press doesn't report the actual details of these trade agreements, or the projected job losses.
If you go into Google News, Yahoo, you'll see over 6000 articles and in the U.S. all of them are superficial "yeah rah". Not a single trade treaty fact, from even one agreement, or a quote from just one politician who might have actually read them, or even a look at the U.S. own analysis that these will lose jobs, increase the trade deficit, in the lot.
This is common when it comes to multinational corporation's wish list agendas to see "article plants".
We're independent, call 'em as we calculate them.
Yesterday the Gray Lady reported the horror of imports slowing down, today confirmed with the very slight drop in the trade deficit. Throughout the analysis, a one-to-one relationship was set up between consumer holiday demand and the volume of imports:
"
“We’re concerned, because usually at this time, you see this peak,” said Richard D. Steinke, the executive director of the Port of Long Beach in California. “We haven’t seen it."
In fact, the five busiest container ports in the United States said that imports in August 2011 were lower than or even with 2010 volumes. In Long Beach, the second-busiest container port by volume, August imports fell by 14.2 percent from August 2010. While the port has not yet released September volumes, a spokesman, Art Wong, said it expected about a 15 percent drop from September 2010. "
What is fascinating, is that there is absolutely no mention of demand for holiday shopping coming from domestically produced sources. In fact NYT does not even attempt to rule out the possibility, of a slight statistical wobble from domestic buying of domestic goods for the holidays. Science is all about controlling your variables and laying out the effect of each variable. If the effect of a variable like domestic demand, is slight, say so statistically.
So we assume as a macro-economy that we do not produce anything domestically for holidays whichy so many celebrate for religious reasons. You have to wonder what they worship. This analysis by NYT is the best argument anyone can dream up against the fantasy of the FTAs helping anyone but the MNCs.
Goldman Sachs is an exceptionally well capitalized Bank by Basel II Standards. GS primary ration is 18.8% and total capital ratio is 23.9%. The ECB today is hoping to get the Euro sector up to 9% primary capital. But look closer at GS.
Total Revenue is almost $40Bn and Expense is $19Bn on 12/31/2010. All compensation is $9Bn. Executive Comp is the lion's share. Of 585Million Common Shares authorized, the restricted stock plans hold 60 million shares, and 231 Million shares are held in treasury. So over the last 4 years, GS has issued 11% of its common shares to executive comp plans or $8.4 Billion.
This number is set against total assets of $911 Million and Equity of $77 Million. So paying out sums like this is a big deal. GS turnover is 40 times its assets. All the action these days is in its derivative portfolio of of $20Billion. Now according the NYTimes on Friday, GS is heading for a loss. This time who is the Uncle Warren to buy some more preferred shares?
Most important, how would GS or any bank more poorly capitalized, issue more common equity when it's executives have taken such a huge share already? The Euro sector banks have similar compensation but much poorer capital ratios. Dodd-Frank has restricted use of bailouts.
All things economic are about choice. You can't do it all at one time. The banks cannot do profligate executive compensation and also recapitalize with more equity. The failure to bring up capital ratios effects macro economies and executive compensation is in the way of better capital rations.
http://investing.businessweek.com/research/stocks/financials/drawFiling.asp?docKey=136-000095012311020067-4KJPN489V5P2LPN44QIT0PG9JV&docFormat=HTM&formType=10-K
These companies are not hiring new college grads either.
This article focused on STEM labor arbitrage because the real statistics rarely make it to the press, and the data to debunk the "labor arbitraging Americans creates jobs" mantra is harder to find. Anyone who is in the STEM fields knows MNCs and others are kicking techies to the labor curb, including advanced researchers.
That said, the "report", has a slew of MNC/corporate wish lists, which others are writing up, such as a tax holiday to bring back their offshore outsourced profits to the U.S. tax free. That's another bold faced lie, these corporations are already sitting on a horde of cash and will not invest in America, hire Americans pretty much. There has been a little movement from Intel for U.S. based FABS, but in terms of hiring U.S. citizens, they simply refuse, esp. if they are older.
There is much more to their demands, bottom line a tax holiday will not create jobs for Americans, it's just another corporate welfare gift.
I think the most odious thing of all is now we have corporate lobbyist demands being issued as a White House report. And they wonder why people have taken to Occupy Wall Street (well, they don't wonder, these corporate PR people just hope you don't figure that out).
Pages