Hillary & Obama … Meet The Kansas Tornado, Mr. Matt Fencl
Submitted By: Matt Fencl
Ladies and Gentlemen, with Obama and Clinton still in a neck and neck race for the democratic nomination, I feel there is no better time to discuss their respective policies toward the emerging economic giant, China. Those of you who know me are no doubt perplexed about my choice of topics. After all, I’m one of the few card-carrying Republicans in the Cal Poly MBA program. Wouldn’t it make more sense for me to contrast McCain’s foreign policies to those of a democratic candidate? Well, not necessarily. I’m an opinionated individual and composing an unbiased article comparing the respective Republican and Democratic positions on China would be nearly impossible. However, I have no preference for either Obama or Clinton; disliking them equally makes me completely impartial. Therefore, here’s you chance to hear their positions with no slant added…a rare opportunity in today’s journalism. If you don’t trust me, you’re more than welcome to read Clinton, Obama Ramp Up Their Rhetoric Against China. Hopefully I’ll spark some much needed discussion and help widen the spread in the race for the democratic nomination.
The first thing you’ll notice in comparing the platforms of Obama and Clinton are that there are not any shocking differences between the two. However, on the issue of free trade, some subtle distinctions can be seen.
Both Obama and Clinton contend that the World Trade Organization and the North American Free Trade Agreement have hurt the U.S. by eliminating manufacturing jobs traditionally performed by the middle class. The irony, and a political liability for Hillary, is that her husband was the president that signed the NAFTA pact back in 1993. Earlier this year in Wisconson, where manufacturing jobs are continually being lost, seven out of ten people blame these job losses on free trade agreements like NAFTA. The attitude toward free trade is darkening elsewhere in the United States as the U.S. economy continues to falter. Over 58% of Americans now believe that free trade is hurting the U.S. economy while only 28% of Americans believe it is beneficial. Clearly both Democrats feel an increasing urgency to capture the votes of these disgruntled Americans.
Whether or not free trade is actually hurting the U.S. economy is an entirely different question. There are a variety of different opinions on this, but I’m only concerned here with the fact that most Americans perceive free trade as negatively influencing the economy.
An emerging pattern begins to develop if you look at Clinton and Obama’s solution to this problem. Hillary believes that the solution is pressuring change on China. Notice the absence of domestic policy proposals in this excerpt from one of her speeches:
“Today, China is most obviously the world’s largest and one of its fastest growing economies. It’s become a global superpower that needs to be convinced to play by the rules in the global marketplace. Here again, the Bush administration has failed. One third of our trade deficit is with China and over the course of the last seven years Bush policies have has allowed the Chinese government to become our banker. Today, China’s steel comes here and our jobs go there. We play by the rules and they manipulate their currency. We get tainted fish and lead-laced toys and poisoned pet food in return. That will change when I am in the White House because I know we have got to take a consistent approach towards China.
I’ve co-sponsored legislation to compel the Administration to take aggressive steps to stop China from manipulating its currency, to make our goods look more expensive. I’m the original co-sponsor of the Foreign Debt Ceiling Act which really means that we would require any administration to begin reversing our trade deficit and start breaking our reliance on China for not only what they provide to us in terms of the way they buy our dollars and buy our debt but also to be held to higher standards for what they import into our market.”
Correct me if I’m wrong, but I read this as a solution grounded in changing how China operates in the world economy. I get the impression that Clinton wants China to “play by the rules,” and that pressuring them to do so will help the United States. Contrast this with a quote from Obama below:
“We’ve got a tax code that is encouraging flight of jobs and outsourcing. And that’s why we’ve specifically recommended … that Congress change our tax code so that we stop giving tax breaks to companies that are moving to Mexico and China and other places, and start putting those tax breaks into companies that are investing here in the United States.”
It has a slightly different vibe to it, agree? Obama talks about changes that need to be made in our domestic policy rather than changes China needs to make. I think this is an interesting distinction between Obama and Clinton that should be weighted in the democratic nomination.
[Note from Prof. Carr -- I titled this post. Matt, if you submitted a different title, let me know and I will change it -- my student assistant is out this week.]
4 comments March 25th, 2008