Clinton Vows to Press Labor Concerns at New Global Trade Summit
President Clinton proposed Wednesday that global trade talks beginning next month tackle one of the most politically and economically sensitive topics in international commerce by establishing a special group to focus on labor standards.
With the U.S. presidential election campaign underway and American labor unions concerned that low pay in foreign countries will entice more jobs out of the country, Clinton offered assurance that unions’ interests are being brought to the trade negotiating table.
“How can we deny the legitimacy, or the linking, of these issues in the new global economy?” he asked in a speech to the Democratic Leadership Council.
The administration provided its most detailed look yet at the priorities it will take into the new round of trade negotiations.
The goal, the president said in remarks prepared for a speech to the centrist Democratic group he helped establish, is to “expand opportunity, from the world’s oldest business, farming, to its newest, electronic commerce.”
With no customs duties yet charged on international telephone calls, fax transmissions or e-mail, the president said: “This is the way it should be. The lines of communication should not crackle with interference.”
The White House is increasingly fearful that a backlash will develop against its work at the World Trade Organization ministerial meeting that opens in Seattle on Nov. 30. U.S. labor, consumer and environmental groups are planning large protests.
Clinton and Vice President Al Gore had looked toward the Seattle summit of more than 130 nations as a triumphant moment for a policy intended to open up markets. Yet widespread anxieties about globalization have increasingly paralyzed White House trade initiatives.
By addressing his political base Wednesday night, Clinton sought support first among those with ties to labor and the environmental community. Their concern is that shabby working conditions and disregard for the environment in poorer nations will encourage manufacturers and other businesses to relocate beyond U.S. borders.
Developing nations, meanwhile, have resisted demands that trade deals impose higher labor standards, which they see as the dictates of wealthy nations. In some cases, they consider their cheap labor a competitive asset.
Leaders of Public Citizen, a Washington consumer advocacy group long at odds with Clinton’s efforts to relax global trade rules, accused the WTO on Wednesday of favoring global corporations and influencing domestic policies protecting health and safety that traditionally have been the province of individual governments.
“This is astounding,” said Joan Claybrook, the group’s president, asserting that international trade regulations were prohibiting governments from protecting their citizens.
Ralph Nader, the group’s founder, said existing trade rules “subordinate the critical health, safety, workplace and environmental standards of all Americans to the imperatives of world trade.”
But Gene Sperling, chairman of Clinton’s National Economic Council, said later that the president’s goal in Seattle, represented by the proposal to create a labor working group within the negotiations, will be to “put a human face” on the global economy.
He said the administration will review the environmental consequences of the negotiations and insist that each country could maintain environmental standards stricter than those provided for in international agreements.
Other priorities for the Seattle talks, Sperling and other officials said, include:
* Insistence that foreign countries rely on “sound science” to determine whether to allow imports of biotechnology products. European restrictions on genetically modified foods from the United States have created a major dispute among the world’s largest economic powers, with vast sums at stake.
* A push to eliminate restrictions affecting new services, such as satellite entertainment and online education, while seeking better access to foreign markets for finance, telecommunications and construction firms.
* Extension of a provision that bans taxes on international electronic commerce, and an agreement to resist any measures that would slow its growth.
* Reduction of export subsidies given to farmers and a reduction of agricultural tariffs charged on imports.
* Immediate reduction of tariffs on imports of chemicals, energy, environmental goods, fish, forest products, jewelry, medical and scientific equipment and toys.
White House officials also vowed to build greater public participation and openness into the WTO.
For presidential candidate Gore, the question of how the administration walks through the political minefield posed by labor issues in the trade talks could not be more sensitive.
The vice president could see the labor support for which he has worked unceasingly begin to sour if unions are not assured that they will be protected--even as the administration encourages greater foreign access to U.S. markets and greater export opportunities for U.S. companies.
Labor’s concerns almost derailed the North American Free Trade Agreement, promoting open trade among the United States, Mexico and Canada, and forced the three countries back into negotiations at the start of the Clinton administration.
Organized labor has expressed concern for the treatment of foreign workers. But the issue revolves primarily around the fear that, without the protection provided by tariffs--and an agreement that foreign companies will not benefit from cost-saving end runs around environmental standards--U.S. workers will be unable to compete with workers in less-developed nations.
Clinton’s outline of the U.S. trade agenda came as the country’s major trading partners squabble over just what topics the Seattle talks should cover.
Europe and Japan have been much warier than the United States about opening up agricultural markets.
Some emerging nations also are wary about eliminating barriers to U.S. service and other industries while they still struggle to nurture their own fledgling operations.
Emerging countries also are seeking greater flexibility in the application of WTO rules, and have met with U.S. and European resistance.
