Payback on our stupidity

FRONT PAGE: "Mexico Strikes Back in Trade Spat," by Greg Hitt, Christopher Conkey and Jose de Cordoba, Wall Street Journal, 17 March 2009.

U.S. NEWS: "U.S. Moves to Patch Mexico Rift," by Christopher Conkey, Wall Street Journal, 21-22 March 2009.

This is direct payback for caving in to the Teamsters on restricting Mexican trucks from entering the U.S. and transporting their cargo directly to destinations. It was only a pilot program for now, but the signal was loud and clear.

This is by far the dumbest thing Obama has done to date, and it's substantial. It was slipped into the $410B spending package he just signed. That alone should have triggered the veto.

Doing this while Mexico suffers so badly from our drug war dynamics, and while we're trying to stabilize the global economy--really dumb.

And then, just when my faith in Obama drops dramatically, he moves to make amends with this pilot program, as his administration "began efforts Friday to ease an erupting trade dispute with Mexico by starting work on a new program to give Mexican truckers broader access to U.S. highways."

You start messing with NAFTA and Mexico retaliates with tariffs, and then you decide to fulfill your commitments.

What did the pilot program show? No major accidents and Mexican drivers pass inspection at a higher rate than American drivers.

Comments

[stuart abrams]

With an economic team of Summers, Geithner, Goolsbee, and Volcker, I really don't see raving protectionism carrying the day in this administration. I thought Andrew Sullivan had a good metaphor - Obama likes to give away the store window but keep control of the store. He recognizes the need to placate the "populists" symbolically on trade, while keeping any substantive changes at a minimum.

[Thunderhart]

Stuart,

I have to disagree with you and Andrew Sullivan, I think you're both far too kind to President Obama on this!

To see a strategy here is to invent something that does not exist on Obama's part. Look at his primary and general election candidacy -- he was the only candidate to offer to renege on NAFTA, he was the only candidate to unconditionally offer to lift the federal oversight on corruption in the Teamsters, and on and on.

Unlike Bill Clinton sixteen years earlier showing clearly during the primary and the general election that he would support passage of NAFTA, Obama staked out the most anti-free trade agenda of any candidate in either party.

I conclude that Obama is one of those unfortunate Democrats who regards the Clinton years as a conservative aberration to be rolled back -- on free trade and, domestically, welfare!

I hope to see more evidence of yours and Mr. Sullivan's perspective being on-target, but as of right now I think you're both being far too hopeful, based on the available evidence.