BEAVERTON, Ore. — Facing resistance from lawmakers in his own party to a sweeping trade deal with Asian nations, President Barack Obama is lining up allies elsewhere — starting at the Nike headquarters in this trade-friendly region.
Obama visited Nike Inc. on Friday as the shoe giant announced it would expand its domestic workforce if Congress signs off on the trade pact. So far, lawmakers are refusing to grant Obama the authority he seeks to close the international deal.
Dissent among lawmakers runs strong in both parties, and on either side of the aisle in Congress. But Obama’s fellow Democrats are the main obstacle, pointing to past deals like the North American Free Trade Agreement as major factors in the decline of U.S. manufacturing.
House Republican leaders have all but acknowledged they don’t have enough support to pass the bill and have yet to schedule votes, making the success of the trade agreement dependent on the president’s personal lobbying effort.
“There have been a bunch of critics about trade deals generally,” Obama told a crowd at the Nike headquarters, hoping to pressure recalcitrant Democrats to support a free-trade deal he says will protect workers and expand access to foreign markets.
“What’s interesting is, typically, they’re my friends, coming from my party, and they’re my fellow travelers on minimum wage and on job training and on clean energy. On every progressive issue, they’re right there with me,” he said, “and then on this one, they’re, like, whoopin’ on me!”
The trade deal with a dozen different Pacific nations, including Japan, Canada, Mexico, Vietnam and Singapore, is the highest priority of Obama’s legislative agenda in the waning years of his presidency. He has personally courted wary members of Congress and promoted the initiative among his core political supporters, ignoring critics who say the deal would be a loser for the middle class.
Last month, Nike offered an unexpected assist in the effort to confound those critics. Officials notified the White House that they were willing to make a public promise about expanding their U.S. workforce, offering estimates that the move would spur 40,000 additional jobs tied to the supply chain and service sector.
Shortly before Obama spoke Friday, the company announced that the expected relief from tariffs on shoe imports and other provisions of the Trans Pacific Partnership deal would enable it to add up to 10,000 manufacturing and engineering jobs in the United States.
The White House views Nike’s announcement as a jolt of energy to its lobbying effort at a crucial point.
Certainly, some Democrats welcome that kind of positive press for the trade deal. Lawmakers from farming states are more open to the idea of such free-trade deals because they are designed to open the sale of American agricultural products to foreign markets.
Likewise, many Democrats in coastal states see the upside in increased commercial activity at ports. Sen. Ron Wyden of Oregon is among key Democrats working to liberalize the trade rules.
“While trade in general tends to divide the president’s party, there are important constituencies within the party who do support trade and are open to the arguments,” said Scott Miller, senior adviser on international business at the Center for Strategic and International Studies.
But one trade opponent, Rep. Brad Sherman, D-Calif., estimated there are 40 votes or fewer out of the nearly 190 House Democrats for the bill that would give the president the authority to finalize the trade deal.
“And I emphasize the less,” he said.
As views harden, lawmakers appear to be pulling away from Obama rather than moving toward his position. None of the top Democratic leaders in Congress has given his or her support to allow Obama the so-called fast-track authority to commit the U.S. to the trade pact.
Many Republicans, meanwhile, who have typically delivered business-friendly votes for trade, are more skeptical of corporate intentions and are deeply reluctant as well to extend more authority to a president they don’t support.
Wyden, a point man in talks, has succeeded in negotiating beefed-up transparency measures that he argued will ensure lawmakers and the public have ample time to review the final trade pact — and shut off fast-track authority if they choose.
“We produced a proposal that is very different than trade policy of the 1990s,” he said.
But those efforts have largely been panned by liberals and skeptical conservatives, and even outside observers bristle that the review period is inadequate.
Columbia University Professor Jeffrey D. Sachs, a leading expert on economic development, called it “unbelievable” that such a far-reaching trade deal was being crafted in a secretive process that would not be opened for broader public consideration until it comes to Congress for an up-or-down vote.
“These things, I believe, need to be debated,” he said during a breakfast this week hosted by the Christian Science Monitor. “It’s, in my opinion, not a proper process, and not what the White House has been saying.”
The complexity of the 12-nation deal has only amplified the grounds for concern over providing the administration with the fast-track authority. Lawmakers want assurances that labor and environmental protections will be enforced, and they continue to be uneasy with the administration’s unwillingness to include stronger protections against currency manipulation.
“This is no breakthrough, it’s not progressive,” said Rep. Peter DeFazio, D-Ore., one of the few Democrats from trade-friendly Oregon who has come out against the deal. “It is what it is: It’s an agreement to chase cheap labor around the world, just like the past agreements.”
Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., wants to attach a broader package of bills, including one that helps retrain workers who have lost their jobs to trade for new careers, to the fast-track bill, which could complicate passage over Republican objections.
Others, though, have calculated that the choices before them may be the best Congress can achieve, and several Republicans wanted to lock in fast-track authority that will extend several years after Obama leaves office.
“This is one of the issues where we seem to be in agreement with the president,” said Sen. Thom Tillis, R-N.C. “We should take the opportunity to get it out there.”
Talk to us
> Give us your news tips.
> Send us a letter to the editor.
> More Herald contact information.
