• The Heritage Network
    • Resize:
    • A
    • A
    • A
  • Donate
  • Will Obama Fight for Free Trade?

    The New York Times reported last week:

    President Obama on Sunday praised the energy bill passed by the House late last week as an “extraordinary first step,” but he spoke out against a provision that would impose trade penalties on countries that do not accept limits on global warming pollution.

    “At a time when the economy worldwide is still deep in recession and we’ve seen a significant drop in global trade,” Mr. Obama said, “I think we have to be very careful about sending any protectionist signals out there.”

    It’s nice that President Barack Obama is admitting his cap and trade legislation will send more U.S. manufacturing jobs overseas, but we’re less than convinced about his newfound commitment to free trade. And neither is White House National Economic Council Director Larry Summers, who said in March of this year:

    When I’ve heard him talk about economic issues—with the exception of NAFTA, where I just hope he doesn’t believe what he says—he seems intelligent and serious. I wouldn’t say I’m bowled over by the brilliance of anything I’ve heard, but everything has a kind of thoughtfulness to it that’s sort of impressive.

    Posted in Economics [slideshow_deploy]

    7 Responses to Will Obama Fight for Free Trade?

    1. Ruth Wayer, Big Rapi says:

      Let's explore the rest of his statement. If you believe that people are responsible for global warming, why doesn't the rest of the world have to be subject to limits on global warming pollution? The U.S. is at least as "deep in recession" as anyone else, and our efforts would be fruitless without worldwide cooperation – IF you believe 1) global warming is real, and 2) Man is responsible for it. If Obama is "thoughtful", doesn't he understand that? Or does he? Makes me continue to question this administration's motives.

    2. Gary, soon to be fro says:

      OBAMA has a single objective, well stated by his spiritual advisor, and being fulfilled at lightening speed, with our economy and every aspect of our country that he can influence with his hate, and that is "God Damn America."

    3. Barb mn says:

      We don't need "thoughtfulness", we need a president who is sound in respect for the country and her people. We need a leader who knows truth from deceit and follows truth. We need a leader who shows no hypocrisy and if the world isn't gonna jump on the band wagon of this fiction of government induced man-made global warming, then America shouldn't be beaten down with unnecessary regulations in industries only causing increased unemployment and business closings or relocations outside America. NEEDLESSLY!

      We need LEADERSHIP that isn't easily influenced by money!

      ps government should be the only area where equal pay is enacted as they steal from us to pay themselves and in return avoid the increase costs they force on us…

      Private sector is NONE OF THEIR BUSINESS!…get rid of these czars. How immaturely pathetic! Another waste of money. Czars are not needed in a FREE COUNTRY OF FREE SOCIETY!


    4. Jon A Firebaugh NC says:

      Right Barb,

      And we need a bottom up revival of the GOP to rid ourselves of dishonest jurists like the Minnesota Supreme Court who violated the fourteenth amendment by allowing individual voting districts to determine the validity of the vote by different standards. I might expect something like that in LA County, but I thought that Minnesota beleived in equal rights for all. Too bad Coleman didn't appeal this to the Big House. Burris and Franken in the same year. VOMIT!

    5. Dennis A. Social Cir says:

      The only difference between the federal "guvernment" and the Boy Scouts, is adult leadership. The government is not lead by an adult, but is lead by a silver tongued idiot.

    6. Barb -mn says:

      Jon, I'm totally embarrassed! That's why I key in lower case. For the last 10+ years, this state has been going down.

    7. Bob, Dayton Ohio says:

      If appointed, will this judge be in favor of free and unrestrained trade in the United States, or is she going to back Obama's disastrous plan to "Go Green," at the expense of American industry and jobs, which he appears to be set on doing regardless of the consequences, and at a pace that will clearly be disastrous to our all ready drowning economy? While I agree that we need to stop greenhouse gas pollution and stop relying upon non-renewable resources, I am certain that Obama is attempting too much too fast and that it is going to bring our nation to its knees at the speed in which he is attempting to enact these legislations. The question is, how will this judge back these plans if appointed and it comes to a case of her having to choose in a judiciary capacity?

    Comments are subject to approval and moderation. We remind everyone that The Heritage Foundation promotes a civil society where ideas and debate flourish. Please be respectful of each other and the subjects of any criticism. While we may not always agree on policy, we should all agree that being appropriately informed is everyone's intention visiting this site. Profanity, lewdness, personal attacks, and other forms of incivility will not be tolerated. Please keep your thoughts brief and avoid ALL CAPS. While we respect your first amendment rights, we are obligated to our readers to maintain these standards. Thanks for joining the conversation.

    Big Government Is NOT the Answer

    Your tax dollars are being spent on programs that we really don't need.

    I Agree I Disagree ×

    Get Heritage In Your Inbox — FREE!

    Heritage Foundation e-mails keep you updated on the ongoing policy battles in Washington and around the country.