Will Al Gore change his position on trade?

My biggest complaint with Gore in 2000 was his support of the WTO, NAFTA and other trade agreements that harm the environment, lower wages around the world and generally benefit large multinational corporations at the expense of workers in all nations involved.

Now that we have seen without a doubt the claims made about the benefits of these trade agreements were completely false, will Gore change his position? I like Gore's progressive speeches in the last few years, but I can't support anyone for President in the primary that gives unqualified support to the WTO, CAFTA and other trade agreements written solely for the benefit of the multinationals. There's more than one way to have a global economy and that model isn't working.

Democrats in general.

if it had been a fight, they would have called it in the first round. I believe Al is more than capable of learning and adapting to a changing world. I also believe he sincerely has the people's interest at heart.

On the surface these things seemed like a good idea, but now that they are a reality, it's like waking up with a bad tequila hangover. Speaking of that, isn't it cinco de mayo?

This will contribute to it.

that, and on the flip flopper thing, Kerry gave them that line by not having an accurate short answer. "The earlier version of the bill was better, when they changed X I couldn't vote for it," and then shut up.

I think Gore would be a great president, but with the right-wing hate media out there and so many sheeple ready to recite the talking points like flip-flopper and Gore Loser, I don't think there is much of a chance for him. If he does run, he's got my full support though.

that's one reason why I supported Howard Dean for DNC chair. The takedown for the Dean Scream was the lamest, most content-free attack on someone ever.

But Dean has kept going.

We can't let the right pick and pick off our leaders.

power of the presidency to revisit the agreements and add language that makes it fairer towards workers and more acceptable to environmentalists.

Clinton didn't show the will to do that, but, I believe both Gore and Kerry would.

From consortiumnews, a brief overview of Kerry on trade - I wouldn't doubt that Gore's current position has evolved in much the same way.

http://www.consortiumnews.com/2004/051304.html

>>>>>>
Trade Debate

Trade is one political issue on which Kerry’s position has evolved over the last decade. In the early 1990s, Kerry was a staunch advocate of free trade, voting for trade agreement after trade agreement. Starting in the mid-to-late 1990s, however, Kerry's position on trade began to shift, as he began to recognize and address the harm that free trade was doing to environmental, human rights and labor protections.

In late 2001 and early 2002, Kerry wrote and sponsored an amendment to a trade bill granting the president “fast track” trade authority. The amendment sought to deny private companies the right to challenge health, labor, environmental or other regulations passed by governments in the public interest.

Under current trade policy modeled after NAFTA, companies can sue governments for passing standards to improve workers’ rights, environmental protections, human rights or any regulation that affects a company’s bottom line. These "Chapter 11" procedures elevate a corporation's right to profit over the public's right to see improved health and safety standards.

Kerry’s amendment proposed limiting a company’s right to sue governments to only matters covered under takings rights recognized by the U.S. Constitution. Though the Senate defeated Kerry's amendment, it represented a concrete shift in his trade policies toward fairer trade.

>>>>>>

Apparently moving most of their workforce overseas won't save GM either because they've already tried that.

and I say that, despite my long-standing, activist stance against the WTO, NAFTA and the rest. I was in Seattle in 1999 protesting against them, so I think I have a hard-earned right to say this. I even think it's possible that Gore is the Corporate Rulers' stealth candidate. They have made things so-o-o-o-o-o bad with Bush junta fascist rule, capped by rightwing corporate control of the the very tabulation of our votes (with "TRADE SECRET," PROPRIETARY programming code), that we will never again put 50,000 people in the streets to shut down a global corporate predator meeting, as we did in Seattle, back then. That may be the plan and the hope of our Corporate Rulers. Clinton was president. Gore was vice president. We were demonstrating against the Democrats--and it was the Democrats who called the Darth Vader police forces out against us. So the fascist corporate cabal said: 'okay, you won't let us loot the planet under the mild Democrats; we'll show you who's in control, and who can make you feel pain.'

I am also a lifelong Democratic voter and supporter/activist, so I get to say this, too. The Democratic Party leadership's corruption and collusion, both as to Bush and his war, and as to war profiteering and global corporate predation, is OUR BIGGEST PROBLEM. The people can't influence criminals like Bush and Cheney--who are now immunized by "trade secret" vote tabulation, controlled by Bushite corporations, as well as by fascist corporate news monopolies. That is the nature of fascism--it is NOT responsive to the will of the people. But the long history of corrosion of our democracy--and the wimpy "opposition" to the fascists that we see now--are attributable to our Democratic leaders' collusion with the Corporate Rulers. It was under CLINTON/GORE that NAFTA was signed--with no environmental or workers' rights provisions (which they had promised in their campaign). It was under CLINTON/GORE and their acquiescence to Reaganite "de-regulation" that monopolistic corporate news organizations really made gains, and that Enron stole $9 billion from the state of California, etc., etc.

The Republican Party leadership has gone fascist, virtually 100% of it. The Democratic Party is a mixed bag, with about half of the leadership being fascists, or semi-fascists, and war supporters, which leaves 25% of the country's political leadership as the true representatives of the vast majority of people. Some of them try, and try hard, but they can barely provide an "opposition," let alone act for the true common good. They are hamstrung by the DLC-type colluders.

Now, in this situation--and given these circumstances--we have two choices: a) whether to rip the Democratic Party and the country apart (which has a haunting parallel to Hitler's rise, wherein the center/left fractured and could not rule); or b) go back to square one--the democracy we had before the Bush junta--and start over, with a far better understanding of who the Democratic leaders are, and what the main problems in our democracy are.

I've been recently proposing a Gore/Kerry ticket in '08--specifically as a RESTORATION ticket. I also call it the Poetic Justice ticket. These are the men whom the American people actually elected. We need to restore order. We need to RESTORE democracy. We need to RESTORE the principle that the people rule. And a Gore-Kerry ticket may be the only ticket than can do so. As a restoration ticket, it has magic; it has name-recognition; it has resonance; and it expresses something that goes beyond normal politics. It represents JUSTICE. Putting things right.

For those of us who represent that radical leftist middle of this country (trust me, most Americans have got things figured out pretty well), Gore-Kerry may seem like a step backward. We don't like Gore on NAFTA. We don't like Kerry on the war, and on his early concession. But we need to understand that the biggest problem in the country right now is that people think that their views, a) don't matter--no one is listening; or b) are not shared by most other Americans. The people have been disempowered and demoralized, and, above all, DISENFRANCHISED. They need to see something good happen! And RESTORING the people we voted for is GOOD. Can you imagine the joy it will bring, to see Gore and Kerry get inaugurated? And they are not stupid or insensitive politicians, by any means. They are very intelligent men. They will put together a fantastic team--one that will make you weep with happiness. COMPETENT people. People into GOOD government. People who CARE about you and me, and our country's founding principles.

I also think this is probably the only ticket that can beat the Bushite-controlled voting machines. I think its win will be so overwhelming, it will blow the machine advantage to Bushites away.

Our country is in very great peril. And I don't have to enumerate what those perils are. We all see them and know them. Our planet, and the rest of the world, are also in great peril from the Bush junta. We MUST stop this junta--even if our Corporate Rulers are playing games with us. We need to restore order, and some sort of balance of power in the government and in the country, or complete economic meltdown, and/or nuclear war, ARE going to happen.

We have unaccountable madmen in the White House. It is a fascist coup. But this is a vast and complicated country, and they don't have total control of it yet. The rebellion of the generals is a good case in point. RESTORATION is STILL a good possibility. It will be very unifying and healing. And THAT's what we should go for--restoration of order, restoration of democracy, restoration of the American peoples' chosen leaders--and then the people of this country will have a fighting chance to address war policy, military spending, trade policy and corporate rule. Without democracy, we have no chance at all.

But he should support modifying provisions of them to make them more labor-friendly.

labor should be able to as well.