House Ways and Means chairman Charles Rangel convened the third of a four-part hearing series on the economy, this one focusing on trade and globalization. As at the first hearing, Executive Intelligence Review was invited to provide testimony, which was stamped "For the Record", and "Full Committee Has Copy". This meant that the testimony was available
in over 200 copies for those in attendance, and given in advance to the 80 congressional members and staffers of the committee. EIR's testimony was the only testimony to demand an end to globalization entirely, with a bold title, "Globalization is the New Imperialism -- Don't Try to 'Improve' It, Bury It!" Restore National Interest Policies". However, the comments of several
members of the committee made clear that a number of the Congressmen had read it, and keyed their questions directly from it.
"Expert" witnesses on the panel included Gene Sperling, from the Clinton administration, now Director for Universal Education at the CFR; Lawrence Mishel, President of the Economic Policy Institute; Harold McGraw, head of the Business Round Table and the Emergency Committee for Trade, New York; and several professors and corporate execs. Most of the questions were directed, especially by the Democrats, to Sperling and Mishel.
This hearing, notably much more so than the prior hearings, heard many congressmen describing in gory detail the loss of manufacturing jobs and collapse of living standards in their districts. At least four members of Congress directly went at the content of the EIR testimony. Most direct was Cong. John Larson (D-CT) -- whose question was "What do you think about a PERMANENT WPA -- TO CREATE JOBS FOR INFRASTRUCTURE -- and if you
agree with a permanent WPA -- how do you pay for it? Sperling did acknowledge that we have to "put infrastructure back on the table", and also that "spending is not always bad". Larson continued, asking about financing infrastructure and a permanent
WPA through a transactions tax, a value added tax, etc. Larson also argued that infrastructure is tied to our national security and national productivity.
Cong. Pascrell (D-NJ) reiterated his comments from the last hearing, that the United States must have a mnaufacturing policy -- that in the Hamilton vs. Jefferson debate (he also cited the Federalist papers as the organizing drive associated with Hamilton's policy on manufacturing), the Founding Fathers had decided that we could not be simply an agrarian economy, but had to develop our manufacturing. He again cited Article I, Section
8, concerning the constitutional role of the Congress regarding matters of trade, currency, and commerce, and reminded all the members that he, and they, had all recently reaffirmed their constitutional oaths of office. Pascrell also cited national security concerns, saying that if we were in fact attacked, we do not have any means to produce to protect ourselves: "We cannot even produce armor any more in the US."
Several members went through the details of the loss of manufacturing in their districts:
1) Stephanie Tubbs-Jones of Cleveland, OH was probably the most dramatic. She cited an official unemployment rate of 13.6%, and the loss of 60,000 manufacturing jobs in the city of Cleveland just over the last 6 years under Bush. She also blasted TAA's (trade adjustment assistance, provided to those who lose jobs due to free trade and globalization), saying ,why not do something to stop the job loss?
2) Cong. Pascrell described a situation right outside his district -- Martell Paper -- which is closing its doors; and the number of people who cannot hold onto their homes, their lives,
etc. He concluded by saying, "WHAT HAS HAPPENED TO MANUFACTURING IN THIS COUNTRY IS SINFUL AND IMMORAL."
3) Congressman Richard Neal (D-MA), who is head of the Machine Tool Caucus in the House, described the situation at the plant in Springfield, MA which produces the Sears ratchet -- the best in the world -- which is now closing their plant. He and all the other Democrats made the point the point, there are excellent products, that the workers "do their part", and yet through no fault of the workers or the plant management, these places are
closing their doors. So globlalization and NAFTA must go, time to go back to a protected economy.
