Last week’s collapse of a potentially critical trade package deal in the House raised questions as to how two-time congressional candidate Ro Khanna’s view on the deal might differ from that of his rival, incumbent Rep. Mike Honda (D-San Jose).
Honda voted against the trade package, like nearly all his fellow House Democrats. Yet, Khanna reportedly didn’t provide a solid stance on how he would vote. Khanna was unavailable for comment but his campaign manager, Brian Parvizshahi, reportedly told the San Jose Mercury News in an email that “Ro agrees with Secretary Hillary Clinton’s recent, thoughtful comments on the issue….He agrees with her that we need to increase TAA [Trade Adjustment Assistance bill] funding and fight for a fully funded highway bill to find a way forward.”
Yet, Clinton’s stance on the legislation is unclear.
Not only has she avoided discussing her views while on the campaign trail, but while Secretary of State, the Mercury News wrote, she supported the Trade Promotion Authority (TPA) bill that gives the president the authority to “fast track” trade legislation. However, in an interview with CBS News last week, Clinton said she would have voted “no” on TPA if she was still a Senator.
Clinton reportedly “declined to take sides on the Friday vote itself but instead allied herself with Democratic critics of the deal–without actually opposing it,” an article in the New York Times noted.
The Mercury News suggests the reason for Khanna’s unwillingness to take a solid stance in opposition to Honda’s views on the TPP legislation is likely because he agrees with Honda on at least a few of the criticisms of the measure.