Barbara Boxer and Jerry Brown

Barbara Boxer and Jerry Brown on International Economic Issues The economic positions of Barbara Boxer and Jerry Brown can be best described as anti-free trade and economically protectionist. They are meant to protect American workers from both unfair competition and fair competition. However, the two also offer productive solutions for the country's current economic problems. It is worth mentioning that Boxer and Brown, although very similar in views, do not have the same focus as they do not seek the same type of political office. Boxer is a U.S.

Senator who has to represent California's interests in the creation of national laws while Brown is aiming to be California's Governor, where his job is to execute effectively the policies determined by California's state legislature. While representing California in the Senate, Boxer voted against promoting free trade with Peru, Singapore and Chile and against the implementation of the Central America Free Trade Agreement.

The only times Boxer voted for free trade was when there were overriding political considerations, as was the case when she voted for the extension of permanent trade rights to China in 2000 and normal trade rights to Vietnam in 2001. Outside of the Senate, Boxer has been a very vocal opponent of free trade and the flight of American jobs overseas. She used this position to criticize her main political rival, Carly Fiorina, of outsourcing 30,000 American jobs while CEO of HP.

Jerry Brown, like Boxer is a vehement and well-known opponent of free trade agreements like NAFTA. Brown garners votes by standing up for the "net losers" of free trade, blue-collar workers who have lost their manufacturing jobs to cheaper labor in Asia. Coupled with the decline of California's once-thriving aerospace industry, this flight has devastated California's manufacturing base. To revive California's manufacturing base, Brown proposes an all-in bet on the clean-energy industry. This would involve California providing outright subsidies and other forms of assistance, e.g.

tax exemptions for businesses purchasing factory equipment. Boxer also advocates clean-energy as an economic sparkplug, though she is a bit lighter on details. Although the two tend to track one another on the biggest economic issues, Brown and Boxer do differ on one key issue that could affect the economy greatly: environmental regulations. Boxer has been firm in her support of environmental regulations. She has made it clear that she wants California and the U.S.

To honor its commitments to reduce carbon emissions, even if, as her opponents point out, other countries like China and India fail to honor their commitments, thereby polluting the environment for us. In fact, Boxer was an early front-line supporter of the controversial cap-and-trade legislation that would essentially make businesses pay for the right to pollute. Although Brown has also been supportive of California's own cap and trade legislation, AB32, Brown has also stated that he will not let environmental regulations get in the way of economic development.

Brown reminds investors that, as mayor of Oakland, he struck down environmental regulations that interfered with his economic development plan to revitalize Downtown Oakland. Although Brown made tough compromises in his effort to revitalize downtown Oakland,.