| | | | |
| May 27, 2000 | atimes.com | ||
|  | China China vote could weigh heavily against Gore By Jim Lobe WASHINGTON - US Vice President Al Gore's hopes of winning next November's presidential elections may have been seriously set back by Wednesday's vote by the House of Representatives to approve permanent normal trade relations (PNTR) for China, according to political analysts here. While the vice president and presumed Democrat nominee tried hard to keep his distance from the intense lobbying campaign mounted by President Bill Clinton and big US business in favor of the bill, he may become the main political casualty of its success. Gore supporters are worried that the bill, which ratifies a sweeping new trade and investment agreement with China, will alienate rank-and-file union members, as well as other traditional Democrat groups associated with the ''Seattle Coalition'' against corporate-led globalization. As a result, they may be more inclined to stay home or vote for third-party candidates. ''If he loses in November, people will look back at this fight as the one that cost him the presidency,'' says John Cavanagh, director of the Institute for Policy Studies (IPS), a left-wing think-tank. ''This vote has really fractured the Democratic Party.'' Indeed, only 73 out of 211 Democrats voted for the PNTR bill, which also implicitly ratifies China's entry into the World Trade Organization. Ultimately, Clinton relied on the House Republican leadership to rally about three-quarters of fellow Republican lawmakers behind the bill. Gore's Republican rival, Texas Governor George W Bush, also strongly endorsed it. ''I am deeply angry that the president working families elected, chose to divide progressive elected officials and their core constituencies at a time when we need to be unified and mobilizing,'' said John Sweeney, the president of the largest US labor union confederation, the AFL-CIO, Thursday. The AFL-CIO, which already has endorsed Gore for president, made defeating the PNTR bill its top legislative priority for the year. The entire US labor movement opposed the bill which, according to it, will result in more US manufacturing jobs being lost to cheap, exploited labor in China. It thus was a natural target for the Seattle Coalition, the name given to a variety of groups which demonstrated against last year's WTO ministerial meeting in the city of Seattle. The coalition - which includes environmental, human rights, consumer, and family-farm groups, as well as labor unions - has argued that corporate-led global economic integration, as promoted by the WTO, the International Monetary Fund, and the World Bank, is leading to a ''race to the bottom'', as countries are forced to compete for corporate investment by lowering standards that protect worker rights and the environment. Most members of these groups vote Democrat. But they have been consistently put off by the Clinton administration's trade agenda, beginning with its support for the 1993 North American Free Trade Agreement (Nafta), which, like PNTR for China, they also saw as a boon for big business at the expense of the environment and worker rights, both here and in Mexico. The Nafta vote split Democrats in Congress down the middle and was held partly responsible for their devastating defeat in the 1994 congressional elections when many rank-and-file Democrats, particularly union members and minorities, stayed home or voted Republican. As a result, the Democrats lost control of the House for the first time in more than 40 years. The last thing the party now wants is a repeat of 1994. But many believe that the China vote - and its significance as a symbol of corporate-led globalization - makes that more likely. Just how much more likely was made clear on the eve of Wednesday's vote, when a clearly frustrated president of the powerful United Auto Workers, Stephen Yokich, suggested that he may urge his members to vote for Ralph Nader, the most prominent anti-globalization figure, who is running as the Green Party's presidential candidate. Assailing the vice president for ''holding hands with the profiteers of the world'', Yokich said, ''It's time to forget about party labels and instead focus on supporting candidates, such as Ralph Nader, who will take a stand based on what is right, not what big money dictates.'' Nader has no chance of winning the election, but his presence in the race represents a very serious threat to Gore, according to recent polls, which show him winning 4-10% of the votes in key states, such as California, which Gore must win in November. Since Gore and Nader attract similar constituencies, Bush stands to be the main beneficiary of any votes cast for Nader. (Bush himself faces similar problems stemming from the Reformist Party candidate, Pat Buchanan, who attacks corporate-led globalism from the right.) Even without Nader, the China vote may reduce voter turnout for Gore, according to Sweeney. ''As in the aftermath of the Nafta growth, it's going to be hard for working men and women to not look at (the China) vote and become more cynical about whether people and principles can pay off in politics - or whether big money is all-powerful,'' he said Thursday. ''We know that people-powered politics works, and we're going to work very hard to get average voters re-engaged.'' Cavanagh agrees. ''Most union people and others in the Seattle Coalition will still vote for Gore,'' he said, ''but they won't be mobilizing others to vote.'' That is also a major concern for Democrat congressional candidates who hope to recapture the House in November. ''In presidential elections, it's the presidential candidates who get people to the polls. If Gore - or his association with Clinton - can't motivate them, then local candidates go down, too,'' according to a congressional aide. For now, Clinton and Democrats who voted against the bill are trying hard to show unity as they did Thursday in a high-profile White House gathering. They are also relieved that the vote took place five months from the election, rather than just before it, as some Republicans had hoped. At the same time, it's clear that trade and globalization have emerged as the single most divisive issue in the party, much to the consternation of the Clinton White House. ''Despite the growth in our economy, despite the record-low unemployment, you see nothing but increased anxiety about globalization, technology and trade,'' said Gene Sperling, a top economic policy maker. ''It's everywhere.'' (Inter Press Service) | |||||||||
 |
 |
| Front | China | Southeast Asia | Japan | Koreas | India/Pakistan | Central Asia/Russia | Oceania Business Briefs | Global Economy | Asian Crisis | Media/IT | Editorials | Letters | Search/Archive Cheap Airline Tickets to Lucknow India |
| back to the top ©2000 Asia Times Online Co., Ltd. Asia Times Online is designed and produced by Multimedia Asia Co., Ltd. |
