About us Login Get email updates
Research
Print

Jack Kemp falsely asserted Clinton and Obama have "call[ed] for a halt to trade with Canada and Mexico"

March 14, 2008 2:39 pm ET

Please upgrade your flash player. The video for this item requires a newer version of Flash Player. If you are unable to install flash you can download a QuickTime version of the video.

EMBED

SUMMARY: On Hannity & Colmes, Jack Kemp falsely claimed that Sens. Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama have "call[ed] for a halt to trade with Canada and Mexico." In fact, both have spoken of "opt[ing] out" of NAFTA if the agreement is not renegotiated.

18 Comments

On the March 12 edition of Fox News' Hannity & Colmes, 1996 Republican vice presidential candidate and Copley News Service columnist Jack Kemp falsely claimed that Sens. Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama have "call[ed] for a halt to trade with Canada and Mexico." He said: "Both Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama are totally wrong in calling for a halt to trade with Canada and Mexico. Are you kidding me? They're our first- and second-largest trading partner." However, neither Clinton nor Obama has called for a halt to trade with Canada or Mexico. Both have spoken of "opt[ing] out" of NAFTA if the agreement is not renegotiated.

During the February 26 Democratic presidential debate in Cleveland, NBC News Washington bureau chief Tim Russert asked Clinton, "Will you as president say we are out of NAFTA in six months?" Clinton responded, "I have said that I will renegotiate NAFTA, so obviously, you'd have to say to Canada and Mexico that that's exactly what we're going to do." Russert reiterated, "You will get out. You will notify Mexico and Canada, NAFTA is gone in six months." She replied, "No, I will say we will opt out of NAFTA unless we renegotiate it, and we renegotiate on terms that are favorable to all of America."

Responding to further questions from Russert, Clinton said:

CLINTON: It is not enough just to criticize NAFTA, which I have, and for some years now. I have put forward a very specific plan about what I would do, and it does include telling Canada and Mexico that we will opt out unless we renegotiate the core labor and environmental standards -- not side agreements, but core agreements; that we will enhance the enforcement mechanism; and that we will have a very clear view of how we're going to review NAFTA going forward to make sure it works, and we're going to take out the ability of foreign companies to sue us because of what we do to protect our workers.

Russert again asked, "Absent the change that you're suggesting, you are willing to opt out of NAFTA in six months?" Clinton responded, "I'm confident that as president, when I say we will opt out unless we renegotiate, we will be able to renegotiate."

Russert then asked Obama, "Simple question: Will you, as president, say to Canada and Mexico, 'This has not worked for us; we are out'?" Obama replied, "I will make sure that we renegotiate, in the same way that Senator Clinton talked about. And I think actually Senator Clinton's answer on this one is right. I think we should use the hammer of a potential opt-out as leverage to ensure that we actually get labor and environmental standards that are enforced. And that is not what has been happening so far."

From the March 12 edition of Fox News' Hannity & Colmes:

HANNITY: But this is where I figure I agree with Senator McCain. I agree that he has been great on the war. I agree -- I love his "no new tax" pledge. I love his pledge to eliminate earmarks. I know he's not gonna nationalize health care. And I think we're gonna have better judges.

A lot -- the other areas we disagree on, so maybe I agree with him 70 percent of the time. How will he persuade the conservatives that he said at CPAC he needs to win this election?

KEMP: Well, you know, you -- you suggest every night that conservatism is just giant monolithic. It isn't. There are differences of opinion. For instance, I believe that John is right on immigration. He talked about people who are children of God, and they should be treated with respect. Throw the criminals out --

HANNITY: I agree with that, too.

KEMP: Wait, wait

HANNITY: Without breaking the law.

KEMP: -- throw the criminals out, but make sure we treat people humanely.

Number two, he's right on NAFTA. Both Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama are totally wrong in calling for a halt to trade with Canada and Mexico. Are you kidding me? They're our first- and second-largest trading partner.

John wants to cut the corporate income tax rate from 35 to 25, wants to expense all investment, and wants to make permanent a 15 percent capital gain tax, a 15 percent dividend tax, and a 15 percent estate tax. That would strengthen the U.S. economy.

Expand All Expand 1st Level Collapse All Add Comment
    • Author by wzwriter (March 14, 2008 2:45 pm ET)
         
      Aren't you glad that THIS clown never made it to VP?????
      Report Abuse
    • Author by IRONY 101 (March 14, 2008 2:45 pm ET)
         
      What the hell, Jack...just lie your a$$ off like the rest of'em. Join the fun. Hey, doesn't Barack Obama want to declare war on Pakistan?  ;>)
      Report Abuse
    • Author by NiceguyEddie (March 14, 2008 2:51 pm ET)
         

      What an idiot.  I can't believe I voted for this guy('s ticket) in 1"996.  Not only have [BO & HC] not said that "they would pull out of NAFTA (despite Russert's best efforts to trap into saying something he could then truncate and misrepresent) but how does pulling out of Nafta equal "stopping trade with Candada and Mexico"?!  How stupid does he think people are?!  We were trading with Canada and Mexico for... what? CENTURIES, maybe? before NAFTA came along.  It could be completely repealed and we still basically do just as muich trade as we ever did!

      This is the same logic as saying that the FISA revisions that they're trying to cram though crongress ALLOW us to spy on terrorists.  Nooooo... we've been doing that for DECADES now.  (Uh... FISA allows it, in fact!)  All it does is eliminate JUDICIAL OVERSITE. 

       Just like all NAFTA does is eliminate IMPORT TARIFS.  Which is not the same thing as eliminating IMPORTS.

      Moron.

      Report Abuse
    • Author by tommy (March 14, 2008 3:02 pm ET)
         
      Well done MMFA, Kemp is mistaken and should apologize for misstating Clinton and Obama's position on this issue.
      Report Abuse
      • Author by TomJoad (March 14, 2008 5:31 pm ET)
           
        what is it with these trite comments? this post doesn't require a redundant validation from you tommy... 
        Report Abuse
    • Author by anotheramerican (March 14, 2008 3:52 pm ET)
         

      What specifically does Obama mean when he says, "I will make sure that we renegotiate, in the same way that Senator Clinton talked about. And I think actually Senator Clinton's answer on this one is right. I think we should use the hammer of a potential opt-out as leverage to ensure that we actually get labor and environmental standards that are enforced. And that is not what has been happening so far." 

      Kemp is right. Obama and Clinton are demagoguing the issue to pander to the rust belt voters in Ohio, Michigan, and Pennsylvania.  

      Obama and Clinton know full well, (as Obama's campaign manager let slip,) they are spouting off in order to trick the voters into thinking they'll somehow be tough on NAFTA. They both realize that if America opts out of NAFTA, Mexico and Canada will both be free to sell their oil elsewhere. It is all talk and Kemp nailed it.

      Report Abuse
      • Author by dbeden4153 (March 14, 2008 3:56 pm ET)
           

        Do you have a link to Obama's campaign manager saying that?

         

        Report Abuse
        • Author by Col. Harlan Sanders (March 15, 2008 10:29 pm ET)
             
          DB, Hope you weren't waiting around for that link. ;0)
          Report Abuse
      • Author by IRONY 101 (March 14, 2008 3:57 pm ET)
           

        KEMP: "Both Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama are totally wrong in calling for a halt to trade with Canada and Mexico.

        When exactly did either Obama or Clinton call for "a halt to trade with Canada and Mexico"? Kemp is the one engaging in demagoguery.

        Report Abuse
        • Author by SFnomad (March 14, 2008 4:07 pm ET)
             

          You'd think that we never traded with Canada and Mexico before NAFTA, eh?

          Report Abuse
      • Author by NiceguyEddie (March 14, 2008 4:24 pm ET)
           
        Mexico and Canada are perfectly free to trade with whomever they choose to now, you dolt!  NAFTA doesn't exclude any of us form trading with ANYONE!  And really... after the mess they've made in the middle east , no conservative should EVER try to make another point about the OIL MAKRET, seeing as the price of a barrel of oil has tripled since Iraq War. 
        Report Abuse
      • Author by solon (March 14, 2008 4:45 pm ET)
           
        No he didnt you are out of your MIND. Kemp LIED. Without NAFTA we would still trade with Canada and Mexico. NAFTA was basically written as an investors bill of rights. IF we want it to be a better trade agreement it needs labor and environmental agreements added to it. I know to some on the right the ONLY thing sacred is the wealthys ability to make more and more money but there ARE other considerations and its an outright LIE to say we wouldnt trade with Canada and Mexico even without NAFTA which isnt what using the threat to renegotiate means. It is also an outright LIE to say Kemp was right.
        Report Abuse
    • Author by MRF (March 14, 2008 4:00 pm ET)
         
      Where is the media on Jack Kemp’s praise of Farrakhan and the Nation of Islam back during the 1996 campaign.  

      http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9500E3DE103BF933A2575AC0A960958260

       

       

      Report Abuse
    • Author by historygeek001 (March 14, 2008 4:12 pm ET)
         
      What planet is this guy from???
      Report Abuse
    • Author by anotheramerican (March 14, 2008 5:29 pm ET)
         

      Having watched Obama and Hillary exchange ads here in Ohio and watching their interviews, it certainly sounds like they are threatening to stop trading with Canada and Mexico unless some sort of "new deal" is presented that is somehow more favorable to the U.S.

      I think you are correct that they never specifically said they'd stop trading.  But I understand where Kemp is coming form. My earlier post was more of a gut level reaction as I interepreted BHO and HRC comments as both of them trying to sound tough but not really saying anything.

      After all, what will they negotiate?  All I hear are platitudes. Is the negotiation all they are promising? What will they do if they scrap NAFTA? What will be the costs to the U.S.?   I haven't heard anything other than populist rhetoric from either of them.

      btw.. funny planet wingnut comment! I was convinced you didn't have a sense of humor. Now I'm not so sure. :-)

      Report Abuse
      • Author by solon (March 14, 2008 5:47 pm ET)
           
        STOP LYING. Even an END to NAFTA is not a TRADE EMBARGO with Canada and Mexico. Its is dishonest to pretend they are the same thing. As has been pointed out we traded with them for an awfully long time BEFORE NAFTA. Using the threat of scrapping the treaty to leverage some necessary labor and environmental agreements is also not the same as scrapping NAFTA but if it WERE that isnt saying we wont trade with Canada and Mexico.
        Report Abuse
      • Author by snoopy (March 14, 2008 6:48 pm ET)
           
        NAFTA was supposed to be an agreement that eliminated tarriffs on imports and create an intra-country environment to rival the EU. However, it has not delivered on certain promises and as such has resulted in many south american countries refusing to join. The litigation clauses also allow a single company to dictate governmental policies - I'm amazed letting a US company overrule the Canadian government and the will of her people is considered a good thing.
        Report Abuse

my.MediaMatters.org

Login  Sign Up

Push Back

Phone calls, emails and letters from the public do make a difference. Remember that to be effective you must be polite, and professional. Express your specific concerns regarding that particular news report or commentary, and indicate what you would like the media outlet to do differently in the future.

Most Popular Tags

Feed IconRSS Feeds

Get personalized rss or email alerts

Connect & Share

Facebook Twitter Digg YouTube MySpace