Fashion & Beauty Editor Tabitha St. Bernard Joins The Made in America Movement Team
Facebook: Tabii Just
Pinterest: TabiiJust
Twitter: @TabiiJust
GSC verification NytroSEO
We asked for legislation to neutralize foreign currency manipulation. They said no.
We asked for comprehensive tax reform to the double taxation of our exports through foreign border adjustable consumption taxes. They said no.
Instead, they file the Fast Track (so-called “Trade Promotion Authority”) bill to these global governance deals like the TransPacific Partnership (TPP) through Congress without any amendment or sufficient debate.
They admit they can’t pass TPP under regular procedural rules because it is so controversial… so they change the rules!
Over 170 members of Congress from both parties, last November, said they opposed Fast Track because it is constitutionally wrong and because it produces bad trade policy.
Tell Congress to oppose Fast Track and support debate under the Regular Order… the ordinary rules of debate and procedures given to every other bill before the House and Senate.
We cannot reform trade policy to grow our economy, create jobs, and protect our constitutional republic unless we stop Fast Track now.
If we get it wrong, the trade deficits will continue eroding the American dream.
We can win this. Tell Congress to oppose Fast Track to keep its power over trade treaties while protecting our sovereignty.
Sincerely,
Michael Stumo, CEO
Coalition for a Prosperous America
Trade is relevant. The U.S. trade deficit, which has grown from a little more than $70 billion in 1993, the year before NAFTA went into effect, to nearly $540 billion today, costs us jobs. Trade deficits represent lost opportunities. The bigger the trade deficit, the more jobs we could have created in the United States but didn’t. Moreover, trade agreements affect our domestic laws. Once we enter into a trade agreement, it’s not so easy to raise tariffs on trading partners that engage in egregious human rights violations—nor is it easy to exit the agreement once we find out it is bad for our economy and our job creation.
Trade also is interesting. Trade rules affect your rights in the workplace, the safety of the food you eat and how clean your water is. Trade rules can affect whether tuna canneries are allowed to tell you if your tuna is dolphin-safe or whether local grocery stores have to label the hamburger you buy with its country of origin. Trade rules can affect the price of the fancy imported cheese you like or how much North American content must be in an automobile for it to qualify for the tariff benefits of NAFTA. And trade rules also can make it easier for an employer to shut down a factory, call center or legal support office and move it overseas. Trade is anything but boring.
And the debate is certainly not over. The proposed TPP is not yet finished—the rules are still being written. Will those rules largely mimic the rules that have helped kill off nearly 6 million manufacturing jobs in the United States in just over a decade? On the other hand, will the rules help make it easier for our brothers and sisters overseas to organize and act collectively to improve their wages and working conditions? Will the rules require our trading partners to protect endangered species? Or will they make it easier for giant global corporations to attack laws banning toxic chemicals? We don’t know the answer to these questions yet—because the deal isn’t done. But if the loudest voices the administration and Congress hear belong to the global corporations who have benefited from past agreements, I can predict what the answers will be. And they won’t be answers we like. If you have not yet spoken up to tell President Obama that America can’t take another NAFTA, now is the time. The president wants to finish negotiating the agreement by October 2013. Tomorrow may be too late.
Workers at most of Cambodia’s more than 500 garment factories are on strike, demanding an increase in the minimum wage to $160 a month, double the current rate. The government has offered $100 a month.
The local human rights group LICADHO said in a statement that at least four civilians were shot dead and 21 injured in what it described as “the worst state violence against civilians to hitCambodia in 15 years.”The statement said that security forces used live ammunition to shoot directly at civilians.
“The use of live ammunition was prolonged and no efforts appear to have been made to prevent death and serious injury,” it said. “Reports suggest that security forces were also injured after being hit with stones.”
It was not clear whether those killed were workers or local residents who had joined in the protest. “They are anarchists, they have destroyed private and state property,” Chuon Narin, the deputy police chief, said by phone. “That is why our forces need to chase them out.” The protesters were cleared from the street, at least temporarily, by early afternoon. The violence comes at a time of political stress in the country, with the opposition Cambodia National Rescue Party holding daily protests calling for Prime Minister Hun Sen to step down and call elections. |
Although the wage and election issues are not directly linked, the opposition has close ties with the country’s labor movement. Last Sunday, many workers joined a massive political rally organized by the opposition.
The workers represent a potent political force, because the garment industry is Cambodia’s biggest export earner, employing about 500,000 people. In 2012, Cambodia shipped more than $4 billion worth of products to the United States and Europe.
Mak Vin, a 25-year-old worker, said he was among those protesting for more than a week over the wage issue. He said that on Friday morning, as the workers burned car tires and shouted slogans, “hundreds” of armed police arrived and opened fire.
“They fired live bullets directly at us. I am very scared,” Mak Vin said.
There had been an earlier clash overnight, with no known fatalities.
Mak Vin said the workers were protesting only for higher wages, and would return to work once that demand was met. He said most workers were not cowed by the shooting, and would continue their strike.
Violent suppression of social and political protests has not been unusual under Hun Sen’s authoritarian government, but there have been few incidents in recent years where more than one person has been killed.
The authorities also usually shy away from using live ammunition in Phnom Penh, where the population is largely hostile to the government.
But the U.N. special rapporteur on human rights in Cambodia, Surya Subedi, said it was the third time since the disputed elections that authorities have shot into a crowd and caused fatalities. He called for an independent investigation into whether excessive force was used. He also expressed concerned about increasing violence by some demonstrators.
The standoff over wages presents Hun Sen with a dilemma, as increasing violence could drive the workers into a tighter alliance with the opposition, providing a vast pool of people for their increasingly confident street demonstrations. But the government is also close to the factory owners, whose exports fuel the economy and who are generally seen as financial supporters of Hun Sen’s ruling Cambodian People’s Party.
Last week, violence erupts in Cambodia when the Garment Manufacturers Association in called for factory owners to close their plants, ostensibly for fear of damage by protesters. The situation puts pressure both on the striking workers, who are not being paid, and the government, which relies on garment exports to power the economy.
While the President originally touted the initiative in his 2013 State of the Union address last February, Thursday’s event will be the first official launch of the program… White House To Announce Manufacturing Hubs.
Those areas, White House officials say, are among the top 20 places most adversely affected by the recession. Each neighborhood or area in the “Promise Zone” has laid out specific goals and will be held accountable by program administrators and third-party experts to track their results.
In San Antonio, Mayor Julian Castro has been applauded by the White House for his efforts to work with federal programs and investments from local businesses to revitalize neighborhoods. The Eastside area of the city has partnered with St. Philip’s College for job training programs in energy, healthcare, and aerospace/advanced manufacturing jobs, among other initiatives.
“Investing in and rebuilding hard-hit communities are important parts of the President’s plan to restore the basic bargain at the heart of the American story – that every child should have a fair chance at success. And that, no matter who you are or where you’re from, if you’re willing to work hard and play by the rules, you should be able to find a good job, feel secure in your community, and support a family,” a White House official said about tomorrow’s event.
The White House has cited the Youngstown, Ohio area as an example of success as a “manufacturing innovation institute” which has turned around a once-shuttered manufacturing warehouse into a thriving 3-D printing center. In 2012, President Obama announced his plan to invest $1 billion in a network of up to 15 similar cities.
That enormous trade deficit with China presents the single biggest impediment to a true manufacturing recovery for the U.S. While the December jobs report showed some promise for manufacturing after nearly a year of weak hiring, January could offer an early clue to what the year ahead will look like. This Friday’s jobs report will tread a fine line: A soft report would suggest that we aren’t yet close to a true economic recovery; another boost, on the other hand, could build the case that manufacturing is gaining some forward momentum.
But even a strong report for manufacturing should be taken with a grain of salt. A hindsight assessment shows that the sector has only recovered a fraction of the jobs it lost during the Great Recession. And looking ahead, the economy hasn’t generated enough steam — nor has Washington generated the right mix of policy — to keep pace with President Obama’s campaign promise to create one million new manufacturing jobs during his second term.
Still, the trade deficit probably won’t make it into the president’s State of the Union speech. It’s a sum that’s easy for policymakers to dismiss as a simple fact of life, one whose impact tends to be indirect. But connect the dots and its effect is clear: As manufacturing shifts from the U.S. to China, that means factories shut down in many American communities. Those laid-off workers, if they were lucky enough to get another job, take significant pay and benefits cuts when they shift to lower-income retail and service employment. That loss of income also means less revenue flowing into the U.S. Treasury, as well as an increased demand for public services, when you factor in those who remain unemployed.
That’s only the direct effect. The indirect one is less spending in and around those former factory towns — at the hardware store, the flower shop, local restaurants — impacting the bottom lines of other businesses. Manufacturing’s multiplier effect of wealth production can work in a very unfortunate, opposite direction, too.
There’s no serious economist out there who thinks a trade deficit this large is a good thing. So the real issue is what should be done about it. There’s a lot we could do, all well within our rights as a trading partner and without fear of provoking that modern economic unicorn, the mythical “trade war.”
First, we could get our own house in order.
The White House and Congress have focused some attention on manufacturing. The president has an advanced manufacturing initiative in place, albeit with modest funding thanks to a stingy Congress. And a significant number of Senate Democrats have launched a manufacturing initiative, echoing their House colleagues who first proposed a “Made in America” plan in 2010. If either plan became law, it would do a lot to increase employment in the sector. And it would put us on par with just about every other industrialized nation; our government is fairly unique in lacking a national manufacturing strategy.
Then, instead of simply pointing to the growth of U.S. exports, and the purportedly dire need to negotiate more trade agreements, the White House should address the trade deficit directly. That starts with a real focus on the surge of imports that keeps boosting our trade deficit, particularly with China.
The administration could back sensible legislation to deter deficit-inflating currency manipulation, which passed the House in 2010, and the Senate a year later in a different Congress. If brought to the floor in either chamber today, it would pass overwhelmingly and would give America’s manufacturers new tools to help confront the undervalued imports that are effectively stealing U.S. jobs.
The administration could block China’s unfair trade practices through a series of actions, using both international and domestic trade laws. President Obama made a big splash in Ohio during his 2012 re-election campaign by announcing a case against China’s unfair trade practices in the auto parts sector. The follow-through in that case is largely missing, however, and little else has been done since then to restore a level playing field for other American companies facing such skewed competition.
The White House could also set objective criteria for reducing the trade deficit with China. For example: Cut it in half over the next three years, through a combination of more value-added exports and fewer subsidized imports. Unfortunately, without such a clear goal, it’s hard to measure any progress besides the monthly ups and downs of the jobs report.
It’s past time to put displaced American workers back on the job. We have an unemployment rate hovering around 7 percent, and our long-term unemployment rate, combined with the number of jobless who have simply stopped looking, shows that the true rate of joblessness is much higher.
America’s workers deserve a government that will fight for them in the trade arena. And the Obama administration should act boldly, instead of offering more of the same. That won’t happen, though, unless the White House pursues an aggressive trade agenda that places the focus squarely on lowering the trade deficit. Otherwise, we’ll know the administration is more serious about its factory photo ops than actually going to bat for American manufacturing.
Before writing his State of the Union speech, I hope the president absorbs the trade data, and starts to envision what a $315 billion annual goods deficit with China means to his constituents on Main Street USA. He might just change his tune, and begin to chart a better course for Made in America in 2014.
Originally published on the Huffington Post, by
Scott Paul on January 7, 2014.
Follow Scott Paul on Twitter: www.twitter.com/ScottPaulAAM
FOSSTON — Stephenie Anderson’s timing for starting a wool-processing plant in Fosston is spot-on. So says Bill Batchelder, president of Bemidji Woolen Mills, and Jim Stordahl, an extension agent in Polk County.
“There’s a renaissance nationwide of returning to products made in America,” Batchelder said. “There’s a large niche of consumers who are demanding natural fibers and American-made products, not ones made overseas.” Stordahl agrees: “She’s part of a changing landscape, a movement where some of this (clothing) will be made back here.” Anderson, 45, who grew up in Fertile, started her Northern Woolen Mills plant two months ago. With eight employees, the business won’t have a big economic impact on this Polk County town of 1,500. However, it’s enough of a jolt that the city gave the fledgling business three acres of land in its industrial park on its western edge and a low-interest $100,000 loan. |
Anderson’s career track, which included management, tourism marketing, and clothing design, took a dramatic turn after her employer had her lobby Bemidji Woolen Mills to resume the manufacturing of wool yarn. The company wasn’t interested, so Anderson filled the niche.
“I saw a need, an opening in the market, and decided to fill it myself,” she said. “Opportunity knocked and I went for it.”
Ironically, her first customer was Bemidji Woolen Mills.
The wool is all USA-grown, including from sheep ranchers in Fosston, Goodridge and McIntosh, and a bison producer in New Rockford, N.D. The equipment also can handle llama and alpaca wool.
When the equipment is all in place within two weeks, Anderson said, Northern Woolen Mills will produce 100 pounds of yarn per day, making it the second-largest processor in the country.
“I used to work in high heels and with (polished) fingernails,” she said. “Now I have grease on my hands and no fingernails. But it’s a lot more fun.”
Making an impact
Stordahl said the endeavor can have an impact on several levels.
“It’s certainly not a new 3M in the neighborhood and, for the average rancher, wool is a minor part of the production,” he said. “But it does fill a niche. And wool has become a high-end fabric. If it’s high-quality wool, it is not scratchy to wear.”
Fosston has become “a hub of unusual agricultural niche products,” Stordahl said, citing the vegetable dehydrating plant in its industrial park as another example.
Chuck Lucken, Fosston’s city administrator, expressed excitement at a new business that didn’t seem likely even a few years ago.
“Any small industry we can get, whether it’s eight jobs or 50 jobs, is a good deal for us,” he said. “Who would have thought wool processing would come back?”
Media: PR Department
Partnership: Marketing
Information: Customer Service