Well, many of us may not have paid that much attention to Daley before. I'm researching him a bit on google so I can better understand the guy who may be stealing this election for Gore.
He helped broker NAFTA, and China trade. Anyway here's a transcript of an interview with him Feb 1999, on CNN:
NOVAK: Bill Daley, a skilled Chicago Democratic operative during President Clinton's first term, managed congressional approval of the free trade NAFTA treaty. But now he leads Clinton administration plans to impose punitive duties against Japan, Brazil, and other countries illegally dumping low-cost steel in the United States.
Last week, it was announced that the Asian recession had caused U.S. exports to drop for the first time in 13 years. And sent the U.S. trade deficit to an all-time high. On Sunday, President Clinton took a hard line in addressing activists from steel workers and other unions.
WILLIAM J. CLINTON, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: We cannot let other economies' difficulties be a justification or an excuse for them to violate trade laws and engage in unfair trade practices.
NOVAK: Before coming to Washington, Secretary Daley was a lawyer, a banker, and politician. He is the son of the late legendary Mayor Richard J. Daley of Chicago and the brother of current Mayor Richard M. Daley, just elected to a third term this week.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
EVANS: Secretary Daley joins us from the Breakers (ph) Hotel in Palm Beach, Florida, where attending an economic conference.
Mr. Secretary, Secretary of State Albright and then later, U.S. Trade Representative Barshefsky are in Beijing this coming week to negotiate with the Chinese. Do you think they will be able to get an agreement so that China can enter the World Trade Organization in time for the visit of the Chinese prime minister to Washington in April?
WILLIAM DALEY, SECRETARY OF COMMERCE: Well, we're hopeful that we could get an agreement. The date and how soon we could get it is not as important as the terms. The president is committed to seeing China into the WTO, but under commercially meaningful purposes, meaning that their market must be opened.
They must put offers on the table to allow U.S. goods to be sold into China, so that this free and open system, that we are the beneficiaries of, -- those benefits can be brought to the people of China and to exporters of the United States.
NOVAK: But sir, what signs are the Chinese made that they are willing to open their system to U.S. exports?
DALEY: Well, we have been -- many U.S. companies have been very successful into China. But we are very disappointed at the same time, with the amount of imports into China from the United States. And we are committed to not let China into the WTO, as is most of the rest of the world, including the mass majority of the European countries, unless there's an agreement on meaningful terms.
NOVAK: Well, will there be an agreement? Yes or no? What do you think?
DALEY: I to be honest with you, Bob, I wouldn't want to guess right now. But we've been negotiating for a very long time. We have seen some movement from China, we have seen a change happening. Obviously the economic situation in China over the last number of years. But we're committed to helping and working with the Chinese, but we're also committed to seeing them come in under the same sort of terms that other countries have come into the WTO.
EVANS: Mr. Secretary, the Senate this week passed a resolution 99 to nothing, charging gross human rights violations against China and asking the president to take the case of human rights violations to the International Human Rights Commission in Geneva. And at the same time, the State Department in a report, charged China with committing widespread human rights violations. What is the Commerce Department position? That it's time to get tough in China?
DALEY: Well, I think the president's commitment to human rights has been clear and very strong for the last six years since he's been president. This report today, that the State Department issued, pulled no punches. At the same time, we believe the way to see those human rights abuses addressed is to continue to engage with the Chinese, pointing out to them when there are situations like this, that are clear, but we're committed to working the Chinese, both on the human rights area and on the commercial area.
EVANS: Though you'd be against taking this up at the Human Rights Commission?
DALEY: Well there hasn't been a decision made, that would be outside the Commerce side.
EVANS: On a related matter, Mr. Secretary, China has been charged by the Pentagon with putting up at least 150 missiles in South China, capable of hitting Taiwan. And they say in a secret accord to the White House, there may be 600 such missile sites in the next few years. The Chinese charge us with re-starting the Cold War. What does all this mean, sir?
DALEY: Well, I think it means that we still live in a world that has the potential to be very dangerous. At the same time, China has played a very important role in trying to deal with North Korea, a most volatile situation in Asia. And so we're working with them. We understand their needs, their problems. But at the same time, we will be very vigilant in our military to make sure that the security of the world is...
EVANS: Does this make your job a lot harder as secretary of commerce?
DALEY: I think there are plenty of things that make my job harder to be exact with you, Rowlie, but at the same time, we are making progress with China on the commercial side and in my opinion in the opening of China in spite of the fact, as the State Department has pointed out, we need to see much further progress.
NOVAK: Secretary Daley, we started this program with a quote from there (ph), with a sound bite from the president addressing a labor group, very tough on this steel dumping. And then addressing the Ways and Means Committee three days later, U.S. Trade Representative Barshefsky said to go easy on the trade dumping because we didn't want to start a trade war.
Isn't that a mixed signal you're sending out, one message from the Ways and Means Committee, one message to organized labor?
DALEY: No, I think to be honest with you Bob, the message is clear and that is we believe strongly in an open trading system. The American economy has benefited by an open trading system. We are the envy of the world right now economically when you look at what's going on -- the growth in this country, low inflation, unemployment at a 25 year low. At the same time, we have laws that we will enforce aggressively when products are brought into this country at the low market prices and they're dumped here.
And the president has stated and Ambassador Barshefsky and myself appeared before the Ways and Means and we said there's a balance. On the one hand we are the beneficiaries of this open system, but we cannot be taken advantage of. And we are aggressively, we in the Department of Commerce, at the president's direction, are aggressively enforcing our laws so that products are not brought in and dumped as it happened from Japan, Brazil and Russia over the last year in steel.
NOVAK: You mention Russia, so explain to me, Mr. Secretary, this quote by you, "We are trying to respond to the steel industry's concerns without bringing Russia to its knees."
DALEY: Right.
NOVAK: Does that mean you have a little -- you allow a little Russian dumping or not...
DALEY: Not dumping. What we did is we entered into an agreement with Russia, a suspension agreement is what it's called, and that will allow a certain quantity of steel to be brought in, back to pre-crisis levels, 1996, at a price that is competitive so that the...
NOVAK: But the domestic industry doesn't like that do they?
DALEY: The domestic industry at this point doesn't like it. But we believe it's the best thing for the steel workers, for the industry, and at the same time trying to make sure that the economic problems in Russia are not made worse.
EVANS: Mr. Secretary, another question on trade. The United States incurred the worst deficit -- trade deficit in history last year. I believe it was almost a $170 billion. How long can the American economy -- how long will manufacturers and labor accept this?
DALEY: But at the same time, Rowlie, that we had this deficit, we have the strongest economy -- unemployment at a 25-year low, inflation under control. There are two reasons why this deficit has skyrocketed. One is because we have such a strong economy. The American people -- consumers -- are buying at a level that is unprecedented.
And at the same time, you have 40 percent of the world economy in recession. So our exports have dropped dramatically, because these economies can't buy the goods. At this point, a trade deficit of almost $160 billion, as you say, is about 1.8 percent of our GDP -- so, far below what it was in the late 1980s.
EVANS: Well, let me just ask you one more on that before we take a break. Do you think this is going to lead to a new protectionism in Congress?
DALEY: I would hope not. I think we have to...
EVANS: What do you think?
DALEY: Well, I hope not, to be honest with you. With elections coming up, there are some people who want to demagogue on this issue, try to demagogue on the pain that some workers are having in the steel industry right now, and I think that's rather unfortunate...
NOVAK: From both parties?
DALEY: From both parties, absolutely.
EVANS: We have to take a break Mr. Secretary and when we come back, we will ask the secretary of commerce, does the hot economy in the United States warrant a major tax cut as the Republicans want. In a moment.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
NOVAK: Secretary of Commerce Daley, the -- your administration put out some phenomenal economic news this week -- a 6.1 percent growth for the last quarter. Now as the representative in this cabinet of business interests -- from all this money flowing into the Treasury from this high growth, do you think the business interests deserve a tax cut? DALEY: Oh, I think as the president has stated repeatedly, Bob, what we have to do with this surplus is to first address Social Security, address Medicare, and then take a look at what other issues there are that need to be addressed.
Congress at this point -- it's rather unclear as to exactly what they want to do with the remainder of the surplus. Some Democrats -- some Republicans want a large tax cut. Others want a small targeted tax cut. And we will be working with the Congress to try to figure out what's the best way to go. But the most important thing in our opinion as the president's has stated repeatedly, is to address the Social Security needs, and the Medicare problem.
NOVAK: So you as the secretary of commerce, representing the business interests, say the business interests don't deserve a tax cut.
DALEY: I'm not saying that they don't deserve a tax cut, nor that the American people don't deserve a tax cut. The fact of the matter is American business earnings are phenomenally doing well, at a time when this economy is strong and will get stronger, in my opinion, over the next number of years.
NOVAK: Just briefly, what about cutting the capital gains tax which actually produces -- it doesn't result in a revenue loss over the years. Surely, you're not against that.
DALEY: I know it's an issue that you have some interest in over the years and one that I'm sure will be discussed again, but to be frank with you, of late, I've not had a lot of people talk about it.
EVANS: Mr. Secretary, I want to ask you about fast-track authority, for the president to make commercial trade deals for foreign countries without having them check back by Congress and vetoed and changed. You said in 1997, I think I quote you accurately, quote, "If we don't do it this year, 1997, we will probably have to wait until 2001." Do you still believe that?
DALEY: Well, there's no question that we're getting closer to 2001, and the reason I said that was because the fear that a presidential election would make it more difficult. I think we have an opportunity this year. I think we all understand the difficulties that are going on around the world and when we see our exports drop, I think the American political system understands that we've got to open more markets.
Plus, at the same time, the business community, Democrats and Republicans, have to join together and understand that we have to address labor and environmental issues. They cannot be ignored.
EVANS: Do think the president will take on big labor for fast track this year as he says he would?
Do you think he really intends to fight for it?
DALEY: I don't think it's about taking on anyone to be frank with you. If we have to take on people, this cannot be won.
What the president said in the State of the Union is, and what we're trying to do is build a consensus around trade, and a consensus around a fast track bill that would address labor and environment. If the business community will not accept that, then they will not have the advantages of a fast track.
EVANS: Well, just yes or no -- can you get the House minority leader, Representative Gephardt, to fight that fight for you?
DALEY: I think we can get the minority leader on behalf of a fast track bill. The question then becomes, if he's on a bill, can the Republican leadership accept that and that's why we have to work together to come up with a bill that we could all support...
EVANS: One more question on this. Are the Asian economies now pretty much back on line?
Certainly South Korea is.
DALEY: I think South Korea is coming back and it's coming back because they've -- and the president has taken some very strong steps in continuing economic reform, opening and changing the system. I think it is still far too early to be frank with you to make a judgment that they're back.
I think it's -- they are going through some structural changes that will be long term, and the difficulties will not ease...
EVANS: But there's still a danger to the American economy?
DALEY: Oh, I think there's no question that there's a danger still lurking out there on behalf of the global economy and not just the U.S. economy.
NOVAK: Secretary Daley, the Supreme Court has ruled that the Census Bureau in your Department of the Commerce, cannot use sampling to do the biennial (ph) census. They have count every person as they have done through the history of the country, yet the Census Bureau this week announced they would do two census tracts, one using sampling, one counting. Isn't that contempt of the Supreme Court?
DALEY: No, not at all. What the Supreme Court said was that sampling could not be used, by virtue of the statute, could not be used for apportioning purposes. But the Census Bureau was required to use it for other purposes where feasible. So, what we're going to use -- we're going to use sampling for redistricting purposes and for redistribution of funds for -- federal funds -- for states.
NOVAK: For redistricting purposes?
DALEY: Redistricting purposes, because the goal here is to have the most accurate census possible. In 1990, Bob. That was the first census ever conducted that was less accurate than the census before.
Eight million people in America were not counted, and we are obligated -- Congress and President Bush went and made the decision that they would go to the National Academy of Sciences and find out what's the best method to use to (OFF-MIKE) the most accurate. And this is what they've come up with.
NOVAK: Can't we be candid in saying that this is all political. The Republicans think that this -- that they're better off if they enumerate each person, and you think the sampling is going to be better to get more Democratic members of Congress.
DALEY: Well, the truth of the matter is that's a political sideshow that's going on.
DALEY: The fact of the matter is what we're trying to do and what the census is trying to do -- the professionals at the census are the ones, and the National Academy of Science, who have come up with the opinion that this is the way to get the most accurate.
The politics of this -- first of all, I think is no where near as dramatic as some people are trying to allege.
NOVAK: One more thing, Mr. Secretary, you know very well they're going to go back to court and try to stop you from doing that. Isn't that right?
DALEY: I assume so.
EVANS: Mr. Secretary, electronic commerce has suddenly burst on the scene thanks to the Internet. And you have estimated I think that electronic commerce by 2002 would be $300 billion a year. Simple question -- will that drive some small businesses, maybe not so small, right out of business that are done from brick buildings, from offices, the way you and I bought our stuff when we were kids?
DALEY: I think it has the potential to be frank with you, of changing the way business is done. No question about it.
There will be companies that will be formed and that will grow because of the electronic commerce. But there will changes. If you look at the pattern of how people shop. Somewhere between $7 and $13 billion worth of retail sales were made over the Internet this past holiday season. What impact that's going to have on the overall economy, overall patterns of retailing, are rather dramatic.
So, there's question there's going to be companies that may be negatively affected, but there's going to be thousands and thousands of companies positively because you take a small company that now can sell around the world.
EVANS: But those companies that are going to be negatively impacted, shouldn't there be some safeguard to ease their progress as they face this challenge?
DALEY: I don't think...
EVANS: Some government...
DALEY: I don't think the government ought to be coming up with a program to try to ease that. That's the market.
I think companies have to decide how they can take advantage of this medium to improve their opportunities. As I say you can have a small company now -- I was up in Massachusetts last week -- there's a small company that was trying to sell children's apparel. They weren't very successful. They changed to developing canine apparel. It's now called canine.com. And they're selling all over the world. And those are opportunities that small businesses have.
EVANS: It takes a good brain to figure that one out. Mr. Secretary, we have to take another break, and when we come back, we will have "The Big Question" for Secretary Daley in a moment.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
EVANS: "The Big Question" for Secretary Bill Daley of the Commerce Department. You said the other day sir that you're not at all confident in corporate America in working out ways to get through the Y2K crisis.
Senator Bob Bennett of Utah, in a report, said he is worried about the whole world not being ready for this. Does that mean that the American people really have to expect a disaster or some kind of a real crisis a year from now?
DALEY: Rowlie, I think that the disaster is not imminent at all. I think there will be disruptions, inconveniences, no question about it, but I think we in the United States, our business community, has moved forward. I think the governments -- federal, state, local -- they have moved forward to try to address this.
EVANS: What is a disruption...
DALEY: Other parts in the world, quite frankly, are nowhere near as far along in their preparations for this problem as we are.
NOVAK: Mr. Secretary, first lady Hillary Rodham Clinton is being talked about as a candidate from -- for the Senate from New York. She's a Chicagoan -- would you as a Chicagoan, a Chicago Democrat -- tell her to hold off in New York and wait to run for the Senate seat held by the Republican Senator in 2004?
DALEY: Oh, six years is a long time. Obviously we in Illinois are very proud of Hillary Clinton and the work she's done and her entire career. She would make, if she decided, a very strong candidate in Illinois or New York. Either state, she would be...
NOVAK: Would you like her to wait and wait for the...
DALEY: I think that's a personal decision. As an Illinoisan, I would think the first lady would be very helpful...
NOVAK: Mr. Secretary as a...
DALEY: ... to the Democratic Party...
NOVAK: Would be very what...
DALEY: Would be very helpful to the Democratic Party in Illinois.
EVANS: Thank you very much.
NOVAK: Thank you very much, Mr. Secretary.
My partner and I will be back with a comment after these messages.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
EVANS: Bob, I don't think you can say that Bill Daley is soft on China. That would not be accurate. But certainly he did not join this hard anti-China line that's coming out of the State Department and the Senate in his conversation with us.
NOVAK: You know, he is a free-trader and he is also a labor man. So, he is trying to guide the administration through a very narrow path, on the one hand, and not being protectionist on the other hand, and satisfying the steel unions and others on the dumping thing. Very difficult proposition.
EVANS: And he knocked me down a little bit on that Y2K question, Bob. He said in fact, look, there may be a few disruptions. It's not going to be serious. I wonder what he means, though, by "disruptions."
NOVAK: He told us he would like Hillary Rodham Clinton to be the candidate in Illinois in 2004, but a lot of people think that Hillary won't last that long. And the candidate for the Senate against Senator Fitzgerald in 2004 will be none other than William Daley.
I'm Robert Novak.
EVANS: I'm Rowland Evans.
freerepublic.com |
