Ramaswamy stands by wage suppressing trade agreements and immigration
GOP presidential candidate Vivek Ramaswamy is under fire for pushing free trade agreements and increased immigration, both of which are widely seen as causing downward pressure on wages.
Populist with anti-populist positions?
The Hill reports Ramaswamy is “leaning into economic populist messaging as he looks to distinguish himself from the other Republican primary contenders.” Ramaswamy's website has “America First 2.0” on its drop down menu, where he explains how he will put Americans first:
From reviving our national identity to unleashing our economy and declaring independence from communist China, Vivek’s vision is focused on national revival, not a national divorce.
He is also using language to perpetuate the populist image:
He’s talking about “revolution” and labels his opponents “super PAC puppets.” He applauds small-dollar donations and calls his campaign a “grassroots uprising.” He criticizes the mainstream media and praises anti-establishment figures on both the right and left.
CNN noted the strategy initially worked as he was, "gaining traction in the polls, backed by a populist outsider message [before getting] stuck in the single digits. . .”
The attention drawn to his stances on trade and immigration could prove problematic, though, for his campaign's attempts to nurture that populist image.
Elon Musk interview
Ramaswamy first ran into trouble in a July interview with Elon Musk on X when he called President Donald Trump's decision to take the U.S. out of the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP), "a poor decision.” The comment was broadcast to a wider audience by Breitbart:
“I think we should re-enter it,” Ramaswamy said to Musk about 94 minutes into the conversation on Twitter. “I think this is a little bit different than what, you know, the course of action taken by Trump in exiting the TPP [Trans-Pacific Partnership]. I think that was actually a poor decision.” [Emphases added].
Fixing TPP
Breitbart noted that Ramaswamy was opposing a “very popular” move by Trump, one which protected the wages of middle-class voters:
Trump’s decision to exit the treaty during his first week in office was very popular because it would have allowed United States companies more opportunities to import low-wage workers for domestic jobs that are being done by middle-class Americans.
Perhaps in anticipation of such criticism, Ramaswamy told Musk that, now that Trump already took America out of the TPP, he would use that as leverage to demand changes from the other TPP nations before re-entering the agreement. But is it fixable? And is it primarily about free trade?
Trade or sovereignty?
A free trade agreement could be one sentence: “Items traded between the U.S. and ____________ shall not be subject to any tariffs.” The TPP, on the other hand, exceeds 5,500 pages in length, as noted by then-Senator Jeff Sessions (R-Ala.), who warned that the document dilutes American strength by giving tiny nations equal voting power in an international commission that can change the agreement after its approval:
“This new structure is known as the Trans-Pacific Partnership Commission — a Pacific Union — which meets, appoints unelected bureaucrats, adopts rules, and changes the agreement after adoption. The 5,554-page accord, disguised as a simple trade agreement, commits the American people to an international commission with the power to act around Congress. It allows 12 nations, some with less than 1 percent of the GDP of the United States, an equal vote in the TPP Commission. [Emphases added].
The New American explained the TPP would subject American taxpayers lawsuits by Communist controlled foreign corporations:
The concerns surrounding the TPP that caused outrage in the United States and around the world include the treaty’s establishment of transnational kangaroo courts purporting to allow foreign corporations and even state-owned enterprises (such as the Communist “companies” in Vietnam) to sue American taxpayers. [Emphases added].
On the other side of the political spectrum, Bernie Sanders attacked the TPP for suppressing wages:
Let’s be clear: the TPP is much more than a “free trade” agreement. It is part of a global race to the bottom to boost the profits of large corporations and Wall Street by outsourcing jobs; undercutting worker rights; dismantling labor, environmental, health, food safety and financial laws; and allowing corporations to challenge our laws in international tribunals rather than our own court system.
Sanders, in fact, is consistent in opposing trade deals, having attacked NAFTA and PNTR as well:
Since 2001, nearly 60,000 manufacturing plants in this country have been shut down and we have lost over 4.7 million decent paying manufacturing jobs. NAFTA has led to the loss of nearly 700,000 jobs. PNTR with China has led to the loss of 2.7 million jobs. Our trade agreement with South Korea has led to the loss of about 75,000 jobs. While bad trade agreements are not the only reason why manufacturing jobs in the U.S. have declined, they are an important factor.
Would a few changes in the thousands of pages of the TPP agreement have it encroach less on jobs or on sovereignty? The very people pushing the agreement say encroachment on sovereignty is actually a necessary component of trade deals.
No need to fix
Proponents of trade agreements claim that they are rightfully lengthy to allow for the control of regulations as well as tariffs. Otherwise, they argue, nations can effectively ban imports, even after a free trade agreement is established, through regulations acting as “disguised restrictions.”
Herein lies the beauty of technical regulations: It is easy to find a compound or material that is perfectly correlated with country of origin, for historical or geographical reasons, and ban it. Firms know this, and lobby their governments to legislate accordingly. Governments, in turn, explain these measures as centering on consumer safety, not commerce, opening up countless opportunities to impose what the WTO calls “disguised restrictions” on trade. [Emphasis added].
Ramaswamy did not explain how he would work with such free trade proponents to protect sovereignty.
Immigrants with college degrees
Earlier in the interview, Musk called for eliminating “ridiculous obstacles” to immigration.
That is the way to continue success … [We] should welcome them, not have all these ridiculous [immigration] obstacles. [Emphasis added].
Ramaswamy responded with one word, “Exactly," before adding the qualification that the immigration should be legal and based on the merit of the immigrants:
We want the best ones who come and follow the process for actually training and joining the team.” And that’s what I think merit-based legal immigration ought to be about.
Breitbart explained the peril this position poses to his campaign:
Many polls show that Americans — especially GOP voters — are increasingly outspoken against both legal immigration and illegal migration that is used to shift vast wealth from middle-class families to business leaders and coastal investors.
The polls show the greatest opposition to migration into corporate jobs. Those much-denied populist attitudes fueled Trump’s win in the 2016 election against the globalist-backed Hillary Clinton, who prioritized Wall Street’s economic growth instead of voters’ pocketbook growth. [Emphases added].
Candace Owens interview
In August, Candace Owens hosted a debate between Ramaswamy and conservative attorney Rogan O’Handley, known on X by the handle DC Draino. Draino took Ramaswamy to task for supporting the TPP and favoring “no cap” immigration for high-skilled immigrants.
The Gateway Pundit reported that Draino claims to have succeeded in getting Ramaswamy to back down on the TPP (in favor of bilateral trade deals) and other issues, but not on immigration.
“And just like magic, Vivek changed many of his positions and now claims: -there was 2020 ballot fraud -only wants bilateral trade deals -regrets getting the vax,” Draino wrote on Twitter.
“But he stuck to his guns on “no cap” immigration for high-skilled immigrants Nobody has been asking Vivek the tough questions even though he’s a Big Pharma exec that appeared out of nowhere, so I did,” Draino added.
DC Draino on the offense
Draino has reignited his feud with Ramaswamy, posting positions of the candidate that are likely to turn away Republican voters. Draino apparently does not accept Ramaswamy's claim of backing away from TPP as genuine since he included TPP support in his list of criticisms:
wants to re-enter TPP
wants uncapped immigration (if they’re educated)
Ramaswamy shot back that Draino should see a therapist for his “pent-up frustrations” while addressing some, but not all, of the accusations.
Draino, in what is, for now, the final word, noted that Ramaswamy failed to address the TPP and immigration in his response.
I also noticed you didn’t deny or even attempt to address issues 5 through 11, but that’s ok I know you’re a busy guy pretending to be America First while you try to drag us back into Obama’s TPP and flood our country with uncapped immigration (as long as they have college degrees of course)
See our previous coverage of the globalis:
- WATCH: Cheney laughs about hiding leadership of globalist group from voters
- Who's behind Fox censoring Tucker? Third rail issues blocked
- State Department pressing allies to concede to Marxist revolutionaries
- Citizens driving through Illinois may soon be arrested at gunpoint by illegal aliens with police badges
- Speaker McCarthy addresses secret, men-only idol worshiping society at Bohemian Grove
