Some interesting stuff happening in the manufacturing sector.  The US Dollar, despite the President's claim today that he wants a strong currency, continues to drop.  Rising material costs, be it ore or petroleum, has had some unintended consequences.  We noted here last week, that many businesses are starting to take a second look at the US given the rise in transportation costs.

This diary is about the nuclear trade deal that President Bush is trying to negotiate with India.  Most progressives, and most democrats oppose it.  

I support it!

For 2 reasons: (a) first, providing India with nuclear fuel may be a critical component in averting global warming.  I will skip that reason for now  (although it is a very important reason by itself). (b)  Instead, this diary will concentrate on the 2nd reason.

First some background on me:

I was born and raised in a part of India that happens to have most of India's known reserves of Uranium.  This region also happens to be one of the most backward regions in India ~ it is struggling to enter the 19th century, and is far removed from the gleaming metropolises of Bangalore and Gurgaon that Americans now associate with India.  The population of the district I was raised in has decreased in the last 25 years ~ people move out in search of better opportunities.

My direct proximity to those regions gave me a direct exposure to the affects of the Uranium mines.  Simply put, mine safety in India is atrocious ~ mine safety tends to be atrocious in all parts of the world where human labor is cheap and expendable.  But mine safety is even more tragic when you are dealing with Uranium.

The region around my hometown is the equivalent of America's Navajo Nation (those who are familiar with Uranium mining in the Navajo Nation will know what I am talking about).  

Remembering events taking place towards the end of February when the talks of NAFTA were heating up in the Democratic election.  Hillary had been consistant in her position on NAFTA.  She didn't support the creation of NAFTA, knows trade is an important part of our economy for business and job creation, and as President wants to revise the agreements to be Fair trade with environmental and labor standards. Obama had recently found this as a political piece of candy to use in an area that had been hard hit on jobs being shipped overseas and tried to tie it to Hillary as all of the sudden becoming a champion for the working class.

Of course, there are many more issues at hand for shipping jobs overseas.  As Hillary has been pointing out for over a year, that the tax loopholes that have since been created, actually giving tax incentives to American Companies who ship their jobs overseas, instead of keeping them in our own country.  She vowed to close those loopholes IMMEDIATELY. We remember too well a perfect example of this when President Bush was campaigning in 2004 in Northern Ohio, with a campaign stop at manufacturing jobs sight, that was supposed to be an example of hard work and good jobs for blue collar workers in our country.  It turned out, they were shutting that place down and moving the jobs overseas.  

However, NAFTA was front and center in a debate in Ohio a week before their elections.  The topic of NAFTA came up, because of the increased campaign talk against NAFTA.  And Obama was circulating a false and negative attack mailer, that it turns out, he was also using early on in the campaign, that Hillary called him out on in a Press Conference.

So I hear you've gone and mailed out another pack of lies about Hillary's trade record and NAFTA.

Huffington Post

[T]he mailer cites a Newsday article from September 2006 concerning Clinton's perceived support for NAFTA. Aspects of that article, however, were retracted because it included the since-discredited line that the Senator said the trade agreement was a "boon." The Obama mailer didn't include the "boon" quote, but even Newsday offered that the use of their piece in a political context could be misleading.

In addition, the mailer criticizes Clinton for supporting permanent normal trade relations with China, citing a 2000 quote she made to CNN: "But on balance, I've looked at this, I've studied it. I think it is in the interests of America and American workers that we provide the option for China to go into the WTO."

Obama, however, has a similar quote from the Illinois Farm Bureau, albeit one with greater caveats and stipulations. "So I think it is important for us to negotiate our trade agreements recognizing that the global economy has shifted," he said in September 2004. "What that means then is that when the Chinese government devalues its currency by 40%, we've got to make sure that we bring China before the WTO. The same way that we get brought before the WTO if other countries think that a disadvantage, that they are being disadvantaged by our existing trade policies."

(Entire mailer at the above HuffPo link)

Ok guys I'm tired and it's getting late, but I wanted to try to balance things out by posting something positive about my candidate.  Hillary announced a new plan to enforce trade laws and I thought it was worth passing along with my good friends here.  Take a look - this woman knows her stuff on this and so many other issues.  And you can take what she says on trade to the bank...

Hillary Clinton Calls For Stepped Up Enforcement Of Trade Laws

Hillary Clinton attended a forum hosted by the Alliance for American Manufacturing and unveiled a new set of proposals to strengthen trade enforcement and crack down on China's unfair trade policies. At the "Forum on Manufacturing" in Pittsburgh, Hillary criticized the Bush administration for failing American workers by not aggressively enforcing trade laws and articulated how she would ensure that trade laws are followed.

"We need solutions to fix our trade laws, build a strong manufacturing base, and stand up to China and say that unsafe toys and unfair currency practices are unacceptable," said Clinton. "I know what manufacturing means for this country. It means good jobs, thriving communities and the products that keep this country going and growing every single day. Our manufacturers and manufacturing workers have shaped our past - and you will drive our future. And if you give me the chance, I will stand strong for you every single day as President."

I've heard all the exciting stories about Barack Obama.  Raised in a middle-class home.  Single mother.  Gave up the high-paying job to become a community organizer.  But let's also remember that he is married to a health care executive, that both he and his wife graduated from Ivy League law schools, and that his controversial mansion in Chicago is hardly middle class.

Hillary needs to make the "anti-trade" economic part of Obama's gaffe the centerpiece of her attacks on him. Instead, I worry she's decided to talk only about the "god and guns" part of his mistake. That's either a huge error in judgment -- the "god and guns" voters are already mostly Repubs by now while huge numbers of "anti-trade" voters are up for grabs in the PA primary -- or it indicates that Clinton's bottom-line beliefs are at one with Obama on the "anti-trade" front. Clinton's positions on domestic policy are consistently more populist than Obama's so she can make a strong populist case for herself if she wants to. Let's see if she wants to on trade.

MY "ANTI-TRADE" RANT

Obama calls my point of view "anti-trade," and yes I am against corporate globalization. In fact, I believe the movement against corporate globalization and back to demand-and-supply-side, sovereign, mildly protectionist Keynesian economics (as practiced from FDR to Johnson/Nixon) is the overriding policy that can gather up a united working class and middle class movement to take power in the industrialized world away from the rich assholes.

In a 2006 op-ed to that haunt of uppity, anti-white, tree-hugging  liberals--The Wall Street Journal--this Senator from the Commonwealth of Virginia, former Navy Secretary under Reagan, former Vietnam veteran, whose son has served in the current war in Iraq, has the gall to suggest that "working Americans" have--dare I say it--"clung" to emotional issues like "God and guns" in the face of economic distress.

The nerve!