The 12-nation Pacific trade deal is the first major policy dilemma of Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign, and she’s under pressure to cast aside her own past as a free-trade proponent and buck the current Democratic president in whose Cabinet she served.
Now, pressure is intensifying from Capitol Hill on the presumed Democratic standard-bearer.
Democratic lawmakers intent on preventing fast-track authority for the Trans-Pacific Partnership are calling on Clinton to take a more definitive stance on the legislation, hoping that she can tip the scales against President Barack Obama’s position. The pressure campaign also has implications for the trade talks with Europe on the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership, which will likely fall to Obama’s successor to complete.
The furthest Clinton has gone is to say that whatever agreements are reached need to protect American workers and have appropriate safeguards. But Clinton owes it to voters — and to the Democratic Party — to more explicitly spell out her views on such a critical issue, a number of Democrats on Capitol Hill who oppose the fast-track authority and the emerging multination agreement told POLITICO.
“I think now that she’s officially declared for president, she should share with people how she feels about it,” said Sen. Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.), laying out a litany of fears over the trade agreement that would be ratified after Congress first approves new fast-track authority. “Certainly these are major concerns — and she should speak to them.”
Merkley isn’t alone. A number of Democrats say their party’s front-runner should lay out her views and concerns with the so-called trade promotion authority bill that’s now dividing their party. The bill would give Obama the ability to finalize trade deals and Congress an up-or-down vote, essentially preventing lawmakers from making any changes.
That fast-track bill — which Clinton has yet to weigh in on — is a necessary first step for the administration to complete the largest trade agreement in American history. The TPP is an accord that could affect roughly 40 percent of the world’s gross domestic product. After a 20-6 vote in the Senate Finance Committee Wednesday night, the fast-track bill is expected to be approved by the full Senate within weeks. But the real question is whether enough House Democrats will join with Republicans to pass the measure.
For that reason, Clinton’s voice could be critical in wooing some wayward Democrats to either support of oppose the fast-track bill.
“I would be very happy if she said, ‘If it doesn’t increase wages, why are we doing it?’” said Rep. Keith Ellison, co-chair of the Congressional Progressive Caucus. “It will be incredibly difficult to talk about doing anything for income inequality and push these trade bills that basically erode Americans’ wages.”
Ohio Sen. Sherrod Brown, a Democratic populist who is leading the charge to kill the measure, said Clinton could help galvanize opposition in Congress.
“The more prominent Democrats and Republicans speak out against it, the more people in talk radio and Sunday morning pundits, the more economists speak out against it is a good thing,” said Brown, who has spoken with Clinton and her campaign on the issue.
“It probably would help on the vote,” said Illinois Rep. Jan Schakowsky, a Democratic opponent of the trade deals. “But I don’t know that’s a goal right now for her to influence the legislative process.”
What complicates matters for Clinton is reconciling her own past support for trade agreements with her effort to strike a populist tone that will help her connect with the progressive wing of her party. In 1993, President Bill Clinton negotiated the North American Free Trade Agreement — one of the farthest-reaching trade deals in history — that Hillary Clinton later praised as “proving its worth.” But the deal infuriated labor unions, a key Democratic constituency Clinton wooed when she ran against Obama in the 2008 presidential contest.
As a senator, Clinton voted for free-trade agreements with Chile, Morocco and Singapore but opposed the Central American Free Trade Agreement, a George W. Bush-era deal. When trying to bolster her support among unions and blue-collar workers in 2008, Clinton slammed potential agreements the U.S. was negotiating with Colombia, Panama and South Korea. But after Obama selected Clinton as secretary of state, she once again expressed support for trade deals, referring to the TPP as a “gold standard in trade agreements.”
“The Clintons have a mixed record when it comes to trade issues,” said Senate Minority Whip Dick Durbin, who recalled being wooed to back NAFTA as a House member by Bill Clinton over a round of golf at the Army-Navy Country Club in Arlington, Virginia.
On Tuesday, Hillary Clinton toed a safe line.
“Well, any trade deal has to produce jobs and raise wages and increase prosperity and protect our security,” she told reporters in New Hampshire. “We have to do our part in making sure we have the capabilities and the skills to be competitive.”
Asked about her position on fast-track authority, Clinton spokesman Nick Merrill said Wednesday that “while this is still being negotiated, she will be watching closely to see what is being done to crack down on currency manipulation, improve labor rights, protect the environment and health, promote transparency and open new opportunities for our small businesses to export overseas.”
For the Clinton campaign, keeping Democrats in Congress in its good graces seems to be a priority. On Tuesday, campaign chairman John Podesta and national political director Amanda Renteria met with Senate Democrats over lunch to provide an introduction of sorts and give a general overview of the campaign. While trade issues did not come up during that short session, they did briefly during a meet-and-greet event between senior Clinton campaign officials and House Democrats Tuesday at the Capitol Hill home of Rep. Rosa DeLauro of Connecticut, one of Congress’ most outspoken critics of the trade deal.
DeLauro, and some other leading liberal Democrats, appeared willing to give Clinton a pass on the matter — for now.
“Every presidential candidate should make themselves known on this issue,” DeLauro said. “They will and they will be asked the question. My attention is singularly focused on defeating this in the House.”
“I think now that she’s officially declared for president she should share with people how she feels about it,” said Sen. Jeff Merkley. | AP Photo
Rep. Pete DeFazio (D-Ore.) added: “I have never had a president agree with me on trade policy in my 28 years in Congress. … I’d love to have her come out against it, but it’s not a litmus test.”
Sen. Brian Schatz (D-Hawaii) sympathized with the position Clinton is now in, noting that she was a senior Cabinet official under Obama, who badly wants the trade deal.
“It’s a delicate situation,” Schatz said. “And we understand that.”
Others appeared wary of crossing Clinton.
“I’m only commenting on the process before the committee,” said Sen. Bob Casey (D-Pa.), a sharp critic of the deal, when asked about Clinton.
It’s also sensitive with the Elizabeth Warren wing of the party that Clinton is now trying to court, which rails on income inequality, big banks and trade deals. Warren and Obama have been feuding publicly over trade this week; Obama went so far as to call out the Massachusetts senator as “wrong on this” and Warren responded in kind.
Warren’s spokeswoman, Lacey Rose, did not respond to multiple inquiries on whether her boss would like Clinton to speak out against the deal.
Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders, an independent liberal firebrand who may run for president, upended the Senate’s Wednesday schedule to voice his displeasure over the trade deal and called on Clinton to step up.
“I think Secretary Clinton and every Republican candidate — and all candidates — have got to say, ‘Enough is enough, we need new trade policies,” Sanders said in an interview.
Still, even some Democrats who weren’t critical of Clinton said — eventually — she would have to assert her preference on whether she backs the fast-track bill.
“This is a major issue, and I think Hillary Clinton will be discussing this at some point in time and giving her view,” said House Minority Whip Steny Hoyer of Maryland.