Are you disappointed that Secretary Clinton opposed your trade deal, particularly given
that your administration has not released the final draft?
And with respect to trade and how Hillary views trade, I’d have you direct questions
to her.
I mean, here’s a general proposition, guys -- during the course of what will be a long
campaign, I probably won’t be commenting on every single utterance or decision that
the various candidates make, because I think that it is natural and proper for candidates
to run on their own vision and their own platform.
And what’s encouraging is the fact that I think everybody on that stage at the debate
affirmed what I’ve said in the past, which is we agree on 95 percent of stuff and on
the basic vision of a country that is building out our middle class, is making sure that
everybody who works hard gets a shot, that believes immigration strengthens us rather
than weakens us, that believes that people should be treated fairly and equally.
The vision of the Democratic Party that I’ve fought for is one that is broadly shared by
all the candidates.
There are going to be some areas where they differ at any given point.
Now, I’m happy to make the case once again for the trade agreement itself.
And I hope, Carol, you take the time to read it because what you’ll see is, is that it
meets the promise that I made -- the most progressive, highest-standard trade agreement
that we have ever put forward that deals with chronic problems like child labor or forced
labor, and is enforceable; that makes sure we are upping our game in the Asia Pacific
region on the environment, and is enforceable; that protects intellectual property that is
the wellspring of innovation here in the United States; that makes sure that our businesses
are treated fairly when they invest in other countries; that opens up markets.
Keep in mind, we have some of the lowest tariffs in the world already.
So we’re already seeing goods and services being sold by other countries here, and the
countries that are part of TPP have significantly higher tariffs.
For us to be able to get those lowered -- just the example of Japan, where they slap on 10,
20, 30, 40 percent taxes on some of our goods and services -- for those to come down and,
in the case of U.S. manufacturing goods, those tariffs being eliminated completely -- that’s
a big deal.
So I’m sure we’ll continue this debate as we post the actual terms of the agreement
and Congress has a chance to review it.
I’m pretty confident I’ll be able to persuade a whole lot of people, once they see the outlines
of the deal, that it’s the right thing to do.
And as President Park indicated, there’s a geopolitical reason for us doing it as well.
We want those of us who already have high standards to make sure everybody else does,
too.
Because that’s going to make our businesses more competitive, it’s going to put our
workers in a better position so that they’re not undercut by low wages or forced labor;
that their plants don’t suddenly shut down because we’ve got environmental laws that
other countries aren’t following.
It’s the right thing to do.