With the support of President George Bush and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, the Peru "free trade" agreement is expected to pass the U.S. House of Representatives. As a populist Democrat, I am very disappointed that our Congressional leaders are allowing this matter to be brough to a vote. As Harold Meyerson pointed out in today's Washington Post, why the Democratic leadership rush to pass more "free trade" agreements ? See link to Meyerson column. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/11/06/AR2007110601809.html
Congressman Peter DeFazio (D-OR) hits the nail on the head that the Peru "free trade" agreement is "by, for and about Wall Streeet." Despite the reality that previous trade agreements have given us a steady increase in the trade deficit (along with a falling dollar), our leaders in both parties want more such accords to further weaken our nation's manufacturing capacity. See the column below from The Oregionian. And Lori Wallach of Public Citizens makes an excellent case for why Democrats in Congress should side with American workers rather than Wall Street.
http://www.oregonlive.com/
DeFazio: Peru deal is "by, for and about Wall Street"
by Jeff Kosseff
The Oregonian
November 07, 2007
WASHINGTON -- Rep. Peter DeFazio, D-Ore., has never been known to hold back his thoughts, particularly when it comes to trade.
In his more than two decades in Congress, DeFazio has been a harsh critic of trade expansion deals, most prominently the North American Free Trade Agreement in the '90s.
As the House prepares to vote on the Peru Free Trade Agreement, DeFazio released a statement calling the U.S. trade policy a "dismal failure" and branding the Peru agreement as "not in the best interest of American workers, the U.S. economy, or our national security."
DeFazio's full statement is after the jump.
"The dollar is dropping like a rock. We're borrowing $2 billion a day from overseas to buy things that we don't make in America anymore. We've lost 4 million manufacturing jobs nationally, and 40,000 jobs here in Oregon due to so-called free trade policies. Millions of middle class Americans are seeing their pay go stagnate or decline. Our current trade policy is a dismal failure. It's a failed engine for America's economy."
"Now along comes the Peru Free Trade agreement. The advocates say the burgeoning middle class in Peru are going to be a huge market for the goods that we don't make in America anymore. They tout the breakthroughs on modest environmental and labor provisions, but the destructive multi-national corporate-written chapter 11 core, that lead to the failure of NAFTA, CAFTA, and other trade agreements, remains at the center of this policy. This agreement is by, for, and about Wall Street, plain and simple. It's not in the best interest of American workers, the U.S. economy, or our national security."
"If trade is the engine that drives our economy, we need an overhaul. Instead, with this bill, we're getting a new hood ornament, some side view mirrors and a misbegotten cousin of NAFTA as a trade policy."
http://www.oregonlive.com/politics/index.ssf/2007/11/defazio_peru_deal_is_by_for_an.html
Lori Wallach of Public Citizens Global Trade Watch explains why Congressional Democrats must support fair trade and oppose the Peru trade deal.
Wallach writes:
While many corporations are eager to obtain the new rights and privileges offered by this FTA, expanding the NAFTA-CAFTA model will harm the interests of most people in both countries. Recent polling has shown repeatedly that the American public has had it with our current trade model. The recent Wall Street Journal/NBC poll found that, by a margin of 2-to-1, even GOP voters think our current trade policy is damaging to them. Democrats won congressional majorities in no small part because of the scores of freshmen elected across the country, including in GOP-leaning districts, who focused their campaigns on stopping more Bush job killing rade agreements. It is good politics – and good policy – for Democrats to create a new trade direction for our country.
Unfortunately, the Peru NAFTA expansion does not accomplish this important goal, nor will the public perceive it as anything but more of the same.Worse, passage of the deal would give President Bush a high-profile victory, changing the message from the debacle in Iraq. It is hard to understand how a Democratic-controlled Congress would give Bush another NAFTA-style trade agreement under any circumstances, but more so the week after he announced he would veto the Democrats’ Trade Adjustment Assistance legislation, not to mention past vetoes of Democrats’ children’s health insurance and anti-war legislation.
There is a long list of trade policies on which the Democratic Congress could take initiative rather than helping President Bush expand NAFTA. We would be excited to work with you to address the imported food safety crisis, fix our disastrous China trade situation, halt the continuing importation of sweat shopmade goods, expand Buy America and anti-offshoring policy, and close the tax loopholes that promote offshoring. Such policies would be a foundation for a new direction on trade which could be built upon when a new president arrives in 2009. The first step towards this new direction is opposing more of the same. Please vote no on H.R. 3688, the Peru Free Trade Agreement.
Sincerely,
Lori Wallach
Director
Public Citizen’s Global Trade Watch
http://www.citizenstrade.org/
Congressman Peter DeFazio (D-OR) hits the nail on the head that the Peru "free trade" agreement is "by, for and about Wall Streeet." Despite the reality that previous trade agreements have given us a steady increase in the trade deficit (along with a falling dollar), our leaders in both parties want more such accords to further weaken our nation's manufacturing capacity. See the column below from The Oregionian. And Lori Wallach of Public Citizens makes an excellent case for why Democrats in Congress should side with American workers rather than Wall Street.
http://www.oregonlive.com/
DeFazio: Peru deal is "by, for and about Wall Street"
by Jeff Kosseff
The Oregonian
November 07, 2007
WASHINGTON -- Rep. Peter DeFazio, D-Ore., has never been known to hold back his thoughts, particularly when it comes to trade.
In his more than two decades in Congress, DeFazio has been a harsh critic of trade expansion deals, most prominently the North American Free Trade Agreement in the '90s.
As the House prepares to vote on the Peru Free Trade Agreement, DeFazio released a statement calling the U.S. trade policy a "dismal failure" and branding the Peru agreement as "not in the best interest of American workers, the U.S. economy, or our national security."
DeFazio's full statement is after the jump.
"The dollar is dropping like a rock. We're borrowing $2 billion a day from overseas to buy things that we don't make in America anymore. We've lost 4 million manufacturing jobs nationally, and 40,000 jobs here in Oregon due to so-called free trade policies. Millions of middle class Americans are seeing their pay go stagnate or decline. Our current trade policy is a dismal failure. It's a failed engine for America's economy."
"Now along comes the Peru Free Trade agreement. The advocates say the burgeoning middle class in Peru are going to be a huge market for the goods that we don't make in America anymore. They tout the breakthroughs on modest environmental and labor provisions, but the destructive multi-national corporate-written chapter 11 core, that lead to the failure of NAFTA, CAFTA, and other trade agreements, remains at the center of this policy. This agreement is by, for, and about Wall Street, plain and simple. It's not in the best interest of American workers, the U.S. economy, or our national security."
"If trade is the engine that drives our economy, we need an overhaul. Instead, with this bill, we're getting a new hood ornament, some side view mirrors and a misbegotten cousin of NAFTA as a trade policy."
http://www.oregonlive.com/politics/index.ssf/2007/11/defazio_peru_deal_is_by_for_an.html
Lori Wallach of Public Citizens Global Trade Watch explains why Congressional Democrats must support fair trade and oppose the Peru trade deal.
Wallach writes:
While many corporations are eager to obtain the new rights and privileges offered by this FTA, expanding the NAFTA-CAFTA model will harm the interests of most people in both countries. Recent polling has shown repeatedly that the American public has had it with our current trade model. The recent Wall Street Journal/NBC poll found that, by a margin of 2-to-1, even GOP voters think our current trade policy is damaging to them. Democrats won congressional majorities in no small part because of the scores of freshmen elected across the country, including in GOP-leaning districts, who focused their campaigns on stopping more Bush job killing rade agreements. It is good politics – and good policy – for Democrats to create a new trade direction for our country.
Unfortunately, the Peru NAFTA expansion does not accomplish this important goal, nor will the public perceive it as anything but more of the same.Worse, passage of the deal would give President Bush a high-profile victory, changing the message from the debacle in Iraq. It is hard to understand how a Democratic-controlled Congress would give Bush another NAFTA-style trade agreement under any circumstances, but more so the week after he announced he would veto the Democrats’ Trade Adjustment Assistance legislation, not to mention past vetoes of Democrats’ children’s health insurance and anti-war legislation.
There is a long list of trade policies on which the Democratic Congress could take initiative rather than helping President Bush expand NAFTA. We would be excited to work with you to address the imported food safety crisis, fix our disastrous China trade situation, halt the continuing importation of sweat shopmade goods, expand Buy America and anti-offshoring policy, and close the tax loopholes that promote offshoring. Such policies would be a foundation for a new direction on trade which could be built upon when a new president arrives in 2009. The first step towards this new direction is opposing more of the same. Please vote no on H.R. 3688, the Peru Free Trade Agreement.
Sincerely,
Lori Wallach
Director
Public Citizen’s Global Trade Watch
http://www.citizenstrade.org/
0 comments:
Post a Comment