SEARCH
Fair Trade Coalition in D.C. to Set Strategies |
In nearly every race in the 2006 election that pitted a supporter of the free trade status quo against a fair trade advocate who backs making the global economy work for everybody, the fair trader won.
Trade was a key issue that helped Democrats regain leadership of Congress in the 2006 elections. But the Bush administration is not listening to the American people and is continuing to pursue bad trade deals that reward corporations and contribute to job loss and massive trade deficits.
Several key trade battles are looming this year on Capitol Hill. Just yesterday, President Bush announced he’s seeking to extend trade promotion authority, known as Fast Track. At the same time, another round of bad trade deals with Peru, Colombia and Panama, could soon be on the floor of Congress.
Because the Bush administration’s trade policies don’t work for working people, the AFL-CIO is joining with key allies at a Trade Strategy Conference today and tomorrow. The conference, in Washington, D.C., will bring together trade activists from around the country to discuss plans and strategies to turn the nation’s trade policies around. Among participants: the Alliance for Responsible Trade, Americans for Democratic Action, Change to Win, Citizens Trade Campaign, Interfaith Working Group on Trade and Investment, Maine Fair Trade Campaign, Sierra Club and Stop CAFTA Coalition.
Panelists will discuss strategies to fight an extension of Fast Track, which was narrowly passed by the Republican-majority Congress in 2002. It allows the president to negotiate trade deals but prevents Congress from improving or rejecting harmful provisions by allowing only “Yes” or “No” votes on final trade deals.
AFL-CIO President John Sweeney says it’s time to change the way Congress considers trade deals:
International trade is important and should be pursued, but it is essential that we get the rules right. Any future trade negotiating authority must require that the negotiators actually achieve the key negotiating objectives, not just “give it their best shot.” Any agreement that gets the expedited consideration and an up-or-down vote included in fast track must include enforceable core international worker rights and enforceable environmental standards. It must also include rules on investment, government procurement, intellectual property rights, and services that strike the right balance between democratic accountability, development concerns and international obligations.
Other issues on the trade conference agenda include developing strategies for a grassroots response in North and South America to trade deals with Peru, Colombia and Panama and making trade an issue in the upcoming 2008 elections.
These three trade pacts follow the pattern of failed trade deals that do not contain enforceable protections for workers’ rights and environmental standards and that limit the ability of governments to regulate in the public interest.
Last month, Deputy U.S. Trade Representative (USTR) John Veroneau conceded that “substantive adjustments” to the labor chapters of the recently negotiated free trade agreements with Peru, Colombia and Panama will be needed to gain bipartisan support in Congress.
But within hours after Veroneau’s statement, USTR spokeswoman Gretchen Hamel issued a statement “clarifying” the situation:
In the case of the agreements that the U.S. has already signed, but which have not yet been approved by our Congress, we believe these adjustments can be made through some binding instrument and it is not necessary to reopen the text of the agreement.
These “binding instruments” can be side letters or side agreements, which are not covered by the same enforcement mechanisms as the rest of the agreement when it goes to Congress. The administration is contradicting itself, says AFL-CIO Policy Director Thea Lee. On the one hand, it’s calling for “substantive adjustments” to the texts of the agreements, while on the other, denying need for renegotiation.
Fair trade activists are encouraged the tide is shifting in Congress on trade. Last month, newly elected members of the House wrote Rep. Charles Rangel (D-N.Y.), chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee, urging new trade policies that save jobs and communities.
The letter says, in part:
Vital to our electoral successes was our ability to take a vocal stand against the administration’s misguided trade agenda, and offer our voters real, meaningful alternatives to the job-killing agreements, such as CAFTA (Central American Free Trade Agreement) that the majority of our opponents supported.
Misguided U.S. trade policies have caused the loss of millions of manufacturing jobs. The Economic Policy Institute pegs more than one million new manufacturing jobs lost directly by NAFTA trade and the U.S. trade deficit is approaching $800 billion.
It is very important that we not only reverse the troubling results of the administration’s trade agreements and trade policies, but also that we are able to deliver on the promise we made to our constituents to move our nation in a new and improved direction on trade.
No Comments
Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.
