Newly released emails by WikiLeaks show that Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton’s campaign staffers discussed how best to “dodge” questions on Trade Promotion Authority last year when the legislation was before Congress.
The legislation, which President Obama ultimately signed into law over the objections of many Democratic lawmakers and liberal groups, especially labor unions, prevents Congress from being able to amend international trade deals, limiting lawmakers to an up-or-down vote.
The email discussion began when campaign staffer Jake Sullivan warned in an April 11, 2015, message that Congress was about to take up the legislation. He proposed that Clinton issue a statement to the effect that she believed that “President Obama should have the negotiating authority to conclude a trans-Pacific agreement” but that it was a “procedural” issue and the key concern would be whether any subsequent trade deal that comes before Congress raises wages and creates jobs.
Campaign spokesman Jennifer Palmieri rejected that approach, saying campaign manager John Podesta didn’t think she should stick her neck out on the issue.
“Boo! My impression of the Podesta approach was more of a dodge then what you have here,” she said, adding, “For example, if she weighs in on length of the TPA I think that will be viewed as passive opposition. Now what you propose would be more popular with Dems and labor and closer to her view — so maybe okay, just want to consider that dynamic.”
Sullivan responded that his proposal was an “alternative if we can’t do pure dodge. Which I don’t think we can.” He argued that it would get across the impression that Clinton wanted Obama to have negotiating authority but didn’t think that Republicans should be able to weigh in.
“This feels more sustainable than full dodge,” Sullivan added. The exchange ended with the staffers deciding to discuss the matter further on the phone later that day.
The following week, the staffers were still fretting about how to respond on the issue.
“Should we deploy the answer that the bill is a procedural matter for Senate to resolve?” Palmieri asked Sullivan.
“We seem to have two options if we’re not going to (grudgingly) support. Say its procedural and we’re not weighing in. Grin and bear it through incoming. [Or] Say we’re studying and then oppose next week (giving White House time),” Sullivan responded.
Podesta backed the second option, but the campaign managed to avoid taking a firm position on TPA at the time. The legislation passed the House in a close 218-208 vote that June. A week after it passed, Clinton told Nevada political writer Jon Ralston that she would have voted against it if she had been in Congress.
TPA was controversial because it strictly limits Congress’ role in trade negotiations. The White House argued that the president needs the extra authority to conduct deals with foreign nations and to ensure that the resulting deal isn’t meddled with later on. Critics in both parties warned that Congress was ceding too much authority.
Clinton has long had a tricky relationship with trade issues, having praised free-trade policies in the past but finding that liberals had turned sharply against them this election cycle. Many on the Left, particularly labor unions, argue that the North American Free Trade Agreement, a deal President Bill Clinton signed in 1993, had cost jobs. As Obama’s former secretary of state, Clinton could not oppose the current deals the White House was backing without looking disloyal to Obama.
The emails were published by the website WikiLeaks and were illegally obtained from Podesta’s email account.
