Obama appoints Xavier Becerra US Trade Represntative

[Hippo_Tron]

Source: US News and World Report

Xavier Becerra will be the next U.S. Trade Representative. Is this a good pick for free traders?

1) America's free trade system "is not only broken but it is broken completely," Becerra said back in 2006 when he argued against the Oman Free Trade Agreement.
2) Says he regrets his vote against NAFTA. Opposed CAFTA but voted for the Peru FTA. Voted to admit China to the WTO. Has a 39 percent rating from the Cato Institute on free trade. Voted against withdrawing from the WTO.
3) Listen to this Daily Kos poster: "If Becerra accepts than it should be a hallelujah moment for progressives and advocates of fair trade. For starters, Becerra is a member of Sen. Bernie Sanders Progressive Caucus, which has long pushed congresses for fairer trade deals.

Read more: http://www.usnews.com/blogs/capital-commerce/2008/12/03/xavier-becerra-us-trade-representative.html

---

I broke this in GDP late last night and it sunk like an anchor so I thought I'd try it in LBN and see if it gets more traction. Maybe somebody else on DU cares about who the US Trade Representative is.

[w4rma]

1. Interesting. Very good. (nt)

[rockymountaindem]

2. I care about who the trade rep. is and I'm very happy to hear of this

It looks like he'll be a good person to have in this position. Anybody who realizes that our trade system is "broken completely" is on the right track.

[Hippo_Tron]

4. Yea and you were one of the two replies to my other thread

I'm actually not surprised that it sank cause of the time I posted it. I'm surprised there aren't other threads about this. Obama appoints someone who is genuinely to the left of the Clinton/DLC types and DU doesn't notice or care.

[Alter Ego]

3. Who is this guy?

Seriously, I know nothing about him--but it looks like he will please a lot of people.

[Hippo_Tron]

6. He's been a Congressman for over a decade and has a very progressive record

He voted against the IWR and is a member of the Progressive Caucus. He voted against CAFTA and the Oman Free Trade Agreement. He did vote for NAFTA but says that he deeply regrets that vote.

[druidity33]

11. your OP states:

that he regretted his vote "against NAFTA".

that's wrong, right?

[Hippo_Tron]

13. Pretty sure that's a typo, think he voted for NAFTA and regrets it

[Zhade]

46. Ahhhhhhhhh.

That makes more sense.

[yardwork]

50. That had me very confused.

[rockymountaindem]

7. Understanding that the current system is broken is a good place to start

I'm not one of the people who thinks tariffs are a good idea de regieur. However, I think if you look at what people like Senator Dorgan have had to say on this issue you'll find that what has been going on since the NAFTA era is a sort of unilateral economic disarmament. While the US has removed our tariffs on many imports, we have not tied that to similar actions on the part of our trading partners. For instance, we allow unrestricted imports of products from South Korea but they continue to levy tariffs on imports of autos and agricultural products, among other things. Sen. Dorgan tried to call that to everybody's attention because it would negatively impact North Dakota's exports of potato products, but to no avail. He's the real watchdog on this issue IMHO, so if you want to learn more you can start by reading up on his position.

Opposing the CAFTA deal is a good sign, as is his opposition to the Oman agreement. The Peru thing is excusable, because IIRC that agreement contained the labor and environmental provisions that the RW so desperately tries to strip out of all our trade bills. Putting those measures in is not only the right thing to do for labor and the environment, but it also helps to stop the practices that make us less competitive.

[PurityOfEssence]

53. My Congressman

He was a Dodd supporter, by the way...

Interesting guy, and has regular "coffee with your Congressman" meetings on Saturdays in the district. Definitely his own man on many things, and he's truly honorable. I don't particularly agree with his vote against the bailout, but he's got his reasons.

[klebean]

76. mine, too. I'm in atwater village - nt

[dmosh42]

5. If he has Bernie Sanders approval, then it's fine by me!

Don't know much about Becerra, but have listened to Sanders quite often, who really has fought for the idea of 'fair trade' to be the goal.

[BelgianMadCow]

21. word. n/t

[KoKo]

28. Same here.......n/t

[Shiver]

8. If nothing else, he has a kick-ass name

A "bonefide" progressive, part of the actual caucus, understands what his job is gonna be. Why does good news sink so fast on this site?

[Ken Burch]

31. If only he'd been a professor at some point.

[Shiver]

32. An excellent point!

We need more mutant representation in this administration! Ororo Munroe as head of the EPA would be a great start, and bring in Rahne Sinclair as ambassador to Scotland... although her anti-choice stance would probably not go over well...

And Wanda Maximoff. I loves me some Scarlet Witch... :loveya:

[Ken Burch]

34. Then again, Senator Kelly could put a hold on all the nominations.

n/t.

[Hippo_Tron]

49. Senator Kelly is obviously a Republican, his hold wouldn't last that long

[Hippo_Tron]

48. I feel like Eric Lensherr as Secretary of Defense would reduce troop casualties drasitcally

But then again I'm not entirely sure we can trust him.

[JDPriestly]

41. He graduated from Stanford Law School -- I believe he was

the first in his family to go to college. His wife is a doctor. Lovely daughter, I believe.

http://becerra.house.gov/HoR/ca31/home

[Ken Burch]

43. Relax...it was an "X-Men" reference...

(Google "Professor Xavier").

[Bluenorthwest]

9. Hey I'm happy about Becerra

And I'm also liking some of the rumblings I'm hearing about other appointments this morning. Actually I'm more than just pretty happy about Becerra, it would be hard to find a better person who both could and would do the job. The man's very capable and he's one of the good guys.

[OhioChick]

10. Sounds good so far. n/t

[bvar22]

12. This is reassuring.

There is an error in your OP.
You say, "he regrets his vote against NAFTA".

I believe he regrets his vote FOR NAFTA.

[Hippo_Tron]

14. I copied it directly from the source, think they made a typo

[jobycom]

22. They did make a typo, he did vote FOR NAFTA in 93, and now regrets that.

So he's against "the NAFTA model."

[Ricki]

15. Becerra is my congressman

I am mixed and actually thought about running against him at one point when he supported Jane Harmon's Homeland Security bill. He ran unopposed this year. I wonder what the process is to replace him in CA. Anyone know?

[Libertyfirst]

29. special election n/t

[The Backlash Cometh]

16. More evidence, that he's listening.

[JDPriestly]

42. Becerra is a really good listener.

This is wonderful, wonderful news. I am elated.

[mopinko]

82. more evidence that he is who we thought he was, rather.

and that some around here have no patience.

[pinto]

17. Great appointment.

:thumbsup:

[dbonds]

18. Free trade is an idealistic myth, like communism

It can never work in the real world. This seems to be a good pick.

[fascisthunter]

44. same thing for libertarianism

utopia...


Having only one form of anything, makes that one thing extremely vulnerable to failure.

Diversity is key to success.

[rhett o rick]

59. And like capitalism (unregulated, that is) nm

[gmudem]

19. Sounds like a good pick.

And I assume the first thread sank because there isn't a lot to complain about with this pick, and many DU'ers would much rather whine as much as possible.

[bdamomma]

20. kick

[Orrex]

23. Does this mean that Wolverine and Cyclops will be protecting our interests abroad?

Wait a minute--Wolvie's Canadian!

[Shiver]

33. Logan would never survive the vetting

The multiple killings would work against him, and many progressives would claim he's nothing more than a pointman for Big Adamantium.

[Orrex]

39. Nice!

:rofl:

[amyrose2712]

54. HAHAH LOL!

[Hippo_Tron]

56. Not to mention the tobacco industry

[democrat0986]

24. K&R

and there was much rejoicing on the left. :)

[Imperialism Inc.]

25. K & R

[tekisui]

26. KNR!

[Tumbulu]

27. Thanks for posting this and I find it VERY encouraging

I am so glad that a progressive's voice will be heard on this issue at long last.

[Ken Burch]

30. Becerra voted FOR Nafta and now regrets it.

Post corrected by self after discovering OP had a typo on Becerra's NAFTA vote.

It's good to have someone who's at least skeptical about globalization in this job. We need someone who will push for an alternative trade structure that doesn't force us and the rest of the world into a race to the bottom.

It's time for Fair and Just Trade.

[smokey nj]

37. Thanks for the correction.

I couldn't imagine why anyone would regret a vote against NAFTA.

[happygoluckytoyou]

35. The only better choice would have been Bernie himself!!! CONGRATS OBAMA!!

[babsbunny]

36. I tried to watch it but,

You can't watch it anymore. Where'd it go?

[codjh9]

38. I didn't even know we HAD a 'US Trade Representative', but I met Becerra when I was knocking

on doors for Obama in NM... amazing to hear this now. Cool, I hope! (I mean I hope he IS good for the job.)

[JDPriestly]

40. My congressman. Am I proud. Do I like him? Yes, yes, yes, yes, yes.

He is a great guy. Regularly holds Saturday morning coffees with constituents in various areas.

[Zhade]

45. Why does he regret his vote *against* NAFTA?

EDIT: I see that was a typo, and he regrets voting for it.

WOW, this is a great sign. Fuck the "free" traders!

[99 Percent Sure]

47. Xavier Becerra is my congressional representative (31st CA district)

And he is quite progressive and mega-responsive to the needs of his constituents. I've contacted his office on several occasions regarding various legislative and community matters, and he's never failed to respond to my/our needs.

He voted against the trillion dollar bail-out both times, which was also very encouraging. It would be a great loss to his consituents, if he accepts, although I believe US Trade Representative would be a good fit for him.

I wish him well.

[JDPriestly]

58. Welcome to DU. I thought I was answering your post.

I count three of us from the 31st District responding to this OP. Interesting. Very liberal district.

[riqster]

51. I like this appointment nt

[JDPriestly]

57. I count 3 DUers in the 31st (myself included).

[jaysunb]

65. I'm in the 29th but

I've worked closely w/ Xavier over the years and you Won't find a more thoughtful & progressive Democrat.

Outstanding selection !

[valerief]

52. Any friend of Bernie Sanders is a friend of progressives! nt

[leftinportland]

55. Agree...

Exactly what I was about to say!

[rhett o rick]

60. Agree. nm

[rhett o rick]

61. Rec. But isn't voting "against with drawl from the WTO", and "Voted to admit China to the WTO", bad

votes? Help me out, I am economically illiterate.

[Hippo_Tron]

62. Depends on who you ask

IMO I don't think so. The WTO is not a free trade agreement. It is an organization made up of 153 countries (basically every major economic power is a member except Russia) that requires its members to give each other equal trade terms. You can have tariffs, but you can't have different tariff rates for different countries. There are exceptions, such as if you have a free trade agreement with another country you can have lower tariffs with that country but in general you have to treat all members equally.

The WTO has its flaws but I think that leaving it would be a grave mistake and denying China membership would be as well. Reforming the WTO and reforming trade agreements like NAFTA and CAFTA are entirely different animals.

[rhett o rick]

64. I need to learn a whole lot more. But I thought the idea of tariffs was to adjust the price of

imported products so that they don't undersell domestic products. This would require different tariffs for different countries based on their prices. Thanks for responding.

[Hippo_Tron]

67. The point of tariffs is to adjust the price of imported products is to protect domestic industry

If the United States wants to protect the steel industry for example, they don't need a separate tariff for Russian steel and British steel. Lets say that Japanese steel is the cheapest, British steel is in the middle, and US steel is the most expensive. If the United States wants to protect their steel then they need to raise tariffs to the level where it doesn't make sense for people in the US to buy Japanese steel.

Without the WTO we could in theory raise the tariff on Japanese steel to where it isn't competitive but have a separate tariff for the British steel to let them have some of our market share. But what this does is create trade wars and poor trading relationships between countries. If we discriminate against Japan they will surely discriminate against us.

The WTO fosters an environment where countries can actually trade with each other without constant conflict and retaliation. Countries are still free to protect their industries if they choose. They just can't give any country (outside of their free trade agreements) more favorable terms than another country.

Again there are some exceptions. Cuba is a WTO member but we completely close off our markets to them. It's actually a clear violation of WTO rules but since the United States is so powerful, nobody really can do anything about it. That is one of the reasons that I don't buy arguments that organizations like the WTO are causing us to cede our sovereignty. That may be the case for smaller weaker countries but the United States can still pretty much do whatever it wants.

[rhett o rick]

68. Don't most of the major industrial countries use tariffs against us? nm

[Hippo_Tron]

69. Yes, but again, not at a different rate than other WTO members

Unless of course they are involved in a free trade agreement. The EU, for example, has a substantial amount of free trade amongst its members. So France, for example, would have the same tariff rates for China and the United States. It would have lower tariff rates for Germany and Spain because they are all EU members.

[rhett o rick]

71. Thanks for the info. But currently we are on the bad end of the trade deals. What has WTO done for

us?

[Hippo_Tron]

74. Again, the WTO isn't a free trade deal

The WTO has facilitated our ability to trade with 152 other nations with some set of norms and without the constant fear of retaliation. Our ability to trade with the rest of the world not only helps us economically but it helps improve our relations with the rest of the world as well.

Being on the bad end of trade deals is not the result of the WTO. It is the result of deals like NAFTA, CAFTA, Oman, etc. where we open our markets but let other countries continue to protect theirs.

[rhett o rick]

81. Thanks for the information. nm

[Kaleko]

70. Interesting. I'm actually learning a few things I didn't know

through this thread. Thanks for posting, Hippo_Tron.

[Hippo_Tron]

73. No problem

I was fortunate enough to have a very good political economy professor who actually worked in the office of the US Trade Representative under Clinton and since it's a subject that I find particularly fascinating so I'm always eager to discuss it with others.

I should add in the interest of full disclosure that the WTO has its problems and that the protesters against it in Seattle did have very legitimate reasons to be there. As I've mentioned above, rich and powerful countries wield much of the power and even though rules are designed to try and help poorer countries develop, rich countries often still do things to their advantage.

Agriculture subsidies is one example of this since they are a form of rich countries protecting themselves that really hurts poorer countries yet the WTO doesn't really have a mechanism to address this. They have tried in the DOHA round and it fails every time. Poorer countries also often can't afford the legal talent to really be effective at the negotiating table.

Of course if you look at it from another angle, rich countries are going to have an advantage in this arena with or without the WTO. The case can be made that on the whole, the WTO promotes equality more than it promotes inequality.

Another valid criticism of the WTO is that it isn't democratic and it isn't a forum for the concerns of labor or environmental groups. If the governments of various countries want to address labor and environmental concerns they are allowed to, but groups like Greenpeace and the IWW are shut out of the process.

On the whole I would say that the WTO is an important organization and that its goals to promote world trade are admirable. It could stand to be changed somewhat. Maybe Bacerra will bring some of that change.

[Kaleko]

77. That's another nuanced explanation from you

which helps shed more light on a very complex topic.

Very credible. You could teach this stuff in community colleges, methinks.

Lordy, I love the net and DU, thanks to peeps like you!

[Hippo_Tron]

84. Thanks, I may end up doing that one day actually

And yea I've learned a lot from DU as well. It's an extremely informative place.

[pam4water]

63. I hope he does more than talk a good game.

[AlphaCentauri]

66. Buena Suerte Xavier in your new job n/t

[kelly4hope]

72. Sounds like a great pick.

[Iwillnevergiveup]

75. Another 31st CA C.D.er checking in

Xavier (pronounced Havier) Becerra is a great choice. He almost always votes correctly and progressively and his office is very responsive to constituents. He'll be a huge asset to the Obama administration.

K&R

[leveymg]

78. This is very encouraging. Trade policy is at least as important as anything DOS does.

Thumbs up.

[dreamnightwind]

79. Awesome!

I don't actually know him but from what I've read here I'm thrilled and completely surprised.

Yesterday I went over the edge at the lack of any progressive direction to Obama's team, and wrote them a note, probably overly harsh, about my disappointment, in their volunteer feedback survey. Among other things I ragged on them for being free traders. Looks like I owe them an apology. Crow never tasted so good.

[robcon]

80. This is a disaster for the U.S., and for the world.

The world depends on the U.S. to promote free trade, as local/national politicians elsewhere pander to anti-free trade sentiment.

There is no more important policy for long term world peace and world prosperity than the U.S. supporting further free trade agreements, as well as further reduction in trade barriers through WTO.

[Hippo_Tron]

83. US will support further free trade

But there's no reason that we can't include stronger labor and environmental provisions in these agreements so that there is more parity in trade. Becerra isn't anti-trade he just wants to see trade agreements written differently.