FTA Passage, the Cold Calculus

Sometimes I really wonder who advises the Blue House on US politics in regards to the KORUS FTA. During the negotiation the US repeatedly reminded the Korean side that there was a deadline on Fast Track legislation, so a deal needed to be done quickly. The Korean response was, “Why doesn’t the President just get an extension?” The Koreans seemed exasperated that the President did not have that authority (de facto or de jure), and the US was equally exasperated on how flippant the Koreans could be of the realities of US politics. It was like a Korean government official saw a “Schoolhouse Rock!” on AFKN in the early 80s, and now he an expert. (I am just a bill, on Capitol Hill…)

I am reminded of the Fast Track debate during the negotiation as the Korean press speculates if Obama would “support” the KORUS FTA. I am equally bemused how people who should know better neglect the obvious.

What I see no discussion of is the most germane, what chance does the KORUS FTA have at being ratified in the Congress? So here I give you my dear reader my estimation of the possible political votes in the US Senate for ratification.

As a framework, let’s look at the roll call vote for the Senate’s passage of the CAFTA agreement in 2005. This successful vote for (54-45-1) was recent, and equal in the size and scope of the KORUS FTA. In that vote by the way, Obama and Biden voted “no” on ratification of the agreement.

When you cross reference that with the list for the new congress, you find the new faces. Let me categorize the new people on whether or not their parities flipped since 2005:

Change in Party

Mark Udall (D-CO)

Jim Webb (D-VA)

John Tester (D-MT)

Sheldon Whitehouse (D-RI)

Sherrod Brown (D-OH)

Kay Hagan (D-NC)

Tom Udall (D-NM)

Bernie Sanders (I-VT)

Bob Casey (D-PA)

Jeff Merkley (D-OR)

Jeanne Shaheen (D-NH)

Clarie McCaskill (D-MO)

Mark Warner (D-VA)

No Change in Party

Bob Menendez (D-NJ)

Jim Risch (R-ID)

Amy Klobuchar (D-MN)

Bob Corker (R-TN)

Mike Johanns (R-NE)

Roger Wicker (R-MS)

Ben Cardin (D-MD)

John Barrasso (R-WY)

To Be Determined

Delaware (currently Biden)

Georgia (currently Chambliss)

Minnesota (currently Coleman)

Illinois (currently Obama)

Alaska (currently Stevens)

Now let us say that everyone who is still in the Senate votes on the KORUS the same as they did on CAFTA. This gives us a vote so far of 36-37, and 27 either new faces or Joe Lieberman who did not vote on the matter (why does that poor fellow’s name always prominently come up in discussions where the middle is so important?).

As you can see this brings up the first tricky matter, a third of the Senate is different in some way from the 2005 vote. It is further clouded by the fact that 20% of those are up in the air. Let’s see if we can at least determine some aspects of who these five people may be.

Three of them Georgia, Minnesota, and Alaska have incumbent Senators. As of the current tally on CNN all are to go the Republican incumbent. However Georgia needs to have a runoff first, Minnesota is razor thin, and Alaska is up in air due to an ethics investigation. For the sake of argument, and to be as charitable as possible to the KORUS’s chances, lets say Chambliss wins the runoff, Coleman holds strong, and Alaska state at least stays GOP and similar to its current representative.

The seats in Illinois and Delaware are easy to pick in party. Both were Democratic. The other Senator of the state is a Democrat. Both states are held by Democratic governors. Both states’ House delegations are predominately Democrat. I am going out on a limb and saying they will remain Democrat. For the sake of argument let’s say as well the new Senators will be in the mold of the previous Senators.

With these decided, we have a new projected vote on the KORUS FTA a tie, 39-39-21.

Now let’s get to the new people. Let us suppose the change in party will bring a change in vote. Likewise if the new face is from the same party, he will mirror the other vote. This gives us a vote of 43-56-1 (again that one being Lieberman). This scenario, perhaps the most likely if you want a short sketch, does not look good for Korea.

Let’s take a different tact. Let’s say the new Senators will vote the same as the other Senator from the state. This is a more interesting result, 49-48-3. The three because we have two new Senators from Virginia. While better than the one before, it still is not comforting.

Let’s look a bit beyond this, and look at the platforms of individuals. Here is are some excerpts from the campaign or Senate websites (unless otherwise stated) of the new faces who represent a party change, and my vote guess, based on the excerpts and previous voting in the state:

Mark Udall (D-CO) (Likely Vote: NAY)

As a Member of Congress I have not been silent on these issues. I have supported numerous trade agreements that have benefited Colorado without disadvantaging American workers, but I have opposed those, like the Central American Free Trade Agreement (CAFTA), that have not included provisions addressing the unfair advantage of countries with lower environmental and labor standards.

Jim Webb (D-VA) (Likely Vote: UNDETERMINED)

I believe that it was imperative to support the Peru Trade Agreement in order to encourage continued improvements in the future.

…

“One thing I have said is that I will sign no trade agreement that does not have in the main body an agreement for the protection of American labor,” Webb said. “You look at [the North American Free Trade Agreement] and these bilateral agreements we have entered into, and there is no specific provisions that protect or even address labor.”

…

I believe that properly constructed trade agreements benefit our country and our workers. Trade agreements that truly focus on fair trade — as well as free trade — provide consumers with goods and services at more affordable prices, make our exports easier to sell abroad, and promote important foreign policy objectives.

John Tester (D-MT) (Likely Vote: NAY)

Recent trade agreements put our jobs and the viability of family farms and ranches across Montana in jeopardy by handing off trade advantage to foreign interests. Jon Tester will fight for Montana priorities in the U.S. Senate by standing firmly opposed to unfair trade agreements that hurt our communities and way of life.

…

The recent passage of the Central America Free Trade Agreement (CAFTA) is but the latest example of how multilateral trade agreements can hurt the American cattle industry and Montana producers.

Sheldon Whitehouse (D-RI) (Likely Vote: NAY)

“It is clear that our previous free trade agreements — including NAFTA and CAFTA — have led to the loss of millions of American manufacturing jobs. Our free trade policy is broken and we should refrain from passing further agreements until we address the flaws that have cost so many hard-working Americans their jobs.”

Sherrod Brown (D-OH) (Likely Vote: NAY)

Trade deals like NAFTA, CAFTA and China PNTR were written and negotiated by multinational corporations and lack protections for workers, the environment, and food and product safety.

In June of 2008, I introduced forward-looking, pro-trade legislation — the Trade Reform, Accountability, Development, and Employment (TRADE) Act. The TRADE Act requires a review of existing trade agreements, and provides a process to renegotiate existing trade agreements. It also outlines principles on labor, environment, investment, and food safety that included in future trade agreements, and strengthens the role of Congress in trade policy making. When we change the process for writing trade deals, we can make trade deals work for more people. [Note this TRADE Act was after the KORUS was finalized]

Kay Hagan (D-NC) (Likely Vote: UNDETERMINED)

For too many years, however, trade deals have been written to pull down wages and working conditions in the U.S. and other developed countries, instead of pulling them up in the developing world. As corporate profits and CEO pay have soared, the incomes of ordinary North Carolinians have stagnated… The negatives of trade are life-changing and fall calamitously on the communities of North Carolina and others that had depended for so long on quality manufacturing jobs.

…

Over the past seven years we have seen a massive explosion in trade and a substantial increase in the number of free trade agreements… However, despite this massive explosion in trade, the Bush Administration has completely ignored its monitoring and enforcement responsibilities.

Tom Udall (D-NM) (Likely Vote: NAY)

Voted NO on promoting free trade with Peru…. Voted NO on implementing CAFTA, Central America Free Trade… Voted NO on implementing US-Australia Free Trade Agreement… Voted NO on implementing US-Singapore free trade agreement… Voted NO on implementing free trade agreement with Chile. (www.ontheissues.org)

Bernie Sanders (I-VT) (Likely Vote: NAY)

What the overwhelming majority of the American people understand is that our trade policy has been a complete failure, it has been bad for the U.S. economy, and it has caused the loss of millions of decent-paying jobs.

The Peru Free Trade Agreement is a continuation of failed agreements such as the North American Free Trade Agreement, the Central American Free Trade Agreement and permanent normal trade relations with China. Instead of enacting yet another job-destroying, unfettered free trade agreement, it is time for us to fix our broken trade policies.

Bob Casey (D-PA) (Likely Vote: NAY)

Sen. Bob Casey yesterday joined a group of fellow senators in calling for Congress to obtain the power to terminate all future free-trade agreements that don’t meet benchmarks for creating American jobs, improving U.S. wages and opening foreign markets to American products… But Mr. Casey said promises of better standards aren’t enough. “I’d like to believe the president and this administration when they say at long last, ‘We’re really going to do the job this time. We’re really going to enforce the law,’ ” he said. “But they have a terrible track record of enforcement. So any agreement that’s hammered out in this building with the administration has to be one with very tough enforcement.”… Pennsylvania has lost 190,000 manufacturing jobs since 2000, Mr. Casey said. “Over many years, we’ve had the devastating effects of bad trade policies and a changing economy,” he said.

Jeff Merkley (D-OR) (Likely Vote: NAY)

Jeff opposes the Peru Free Trade Agreement, and other trade agreements that use NAFTA as a model… So we absolutely MUST resist any attempt to give this and future Presidents fast track trade authority without Congressional oversight.

Jeanne Shaheen (D-NH) (Likely Vote: YEA)

Develop an open North American energy market…Foster globalization with New England & Eastern Canada… More business cooperation between New England & East Canada. (www.ontheissues.org)

Clarie McCaskill (D-MO) (Likely Vote: NAY)

Washington has made a mess out of our finances. Reckless spending, runaway deficits, a growing trade imbalance with China, all add up to a dire fiscal picture impacting every Missourian… Claire believes trade policies must raise living standards for both workers here and abroad. Basic standards of fairness and decency to working people must be incorporated into all our trade policies.

…

Voted against the Peru Trade Agreement [-ed.]

Mark Warner (D-VA) (Likely Vote: UNDETERMINED)

Supports NAFTA, GATT, and WTO (www.ontheissues.org)

WIth those likely votes, the CAFTA base line, and the five undecided races decided as above, we have a vote of 40-48-11. This is just a difference of two votes for the side to defeat the bill. Meanwhile look at the other list of non-party flipping newbies:

Bob Menendez (D-NJ)

Jim Risch (R-ID)

Amy Klobuchar (D-MN)

Bob Corker (R-TN)

Mike Johanns (R-NE)

Roger Wicker (R-MS)

Ben Cardin (D-MD)

John Barrasso (R-WY)

If they vote like their very similar predecessors, they split. So we get a final projected vote of 44-52-4. Again, a defeat.

Sorry AMCHAM, without re-negotiation, unexpected and unprecedented enthusiasms, and perhaps both, it’s over.