Reform NAFTA? How?

[AntiLempa]

Lately there has been a lot of talk about reforming NAFTA. Howard Dean has said it, Gephardt has said it, DUers have said it. . .Hell, I even heard it on talk radio last night. Actually, the guy on talk radio was a staunch Republican and he favored repealing NAFTA. In fact, he said that he was so fed up with how things aer going that he will not vote for Bush. Granted he also said that he wouldn't vote for a Democrat, but this is a start.

Even the mainstream media is beginning to report so called free trade's shortcomings. It seems that now more than ever there is momentum to reform this aspect of our economic system.

If I was in a position of influence, I would push for the repeal of NAFTA and to disband the WTO. In there place, I would push for a greater role of the United Nations. If used properly, this strategy could help strengthen the UN, improve living conditions throughout the world, and improve America’s reputation.

The UN is a Democratic institution, something that NAFTA or the WTO could never be. I believe that this must be taken advantage of and promoted.

What are your thoughts? Should we reform NAFTA and the WTO? If so, how?

[WhoCountsTheVotes]

1. Repeal it

International trade has been around forever, and it's not going away. The last thing we need is a treaty like NAFTA, that gives investors and corporations the rights and power to challenge democratic governments. Tariffs can often have a negative effect, so perhaps we should keep tariffs very low. Regardless, I don't want corporations and politicans and CEOs creating a new international system where corporations have power over governments.


9% of DU thinks WhoCountsTheVotes is a "paid Republican disruptor hired by Rove" - 19% think WhoCountsTheVotes is an "angry Democratic class warrior" - 69% think WhoCountsTheVotes is "just an ass" - 3% margin of error

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=104&topic_id=133618&mesg_id=133618

[AntiLempa]

5. UN?

What do you think about my proposal to get the UN involved?

[WhoCountsTheVotes]

6. getting the UN involved would be good, imo

The UN is a quasi-Republic, pretty much copied straight from the US. It's the *perfect* place to discuss international trade and come to economic agreements.


9% of DU thinks WhoCountsTheVotes is a "paid Republican disruptor hired by Rove" - 19% think WhoCountsTheVotes is an "angry Democratic class warrior" - 69% think WhoCountsTheVotes is "just an ass" - 3% margin of error

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=104&topic_id=133618&mesg_id=133618

[papau]

2. Reform =Agree by treaty on min wage, labor, and environment rules

The concern with trade - which in theory makes everyone wealthy - is that the Wealth are using it to destroy wages, labor laws, and the environment around the world.

One should not be able to tell American workers that they must take pay cuts because someone elsewhere is starving and willing to work for a bowl of soup and a bed each day - plus $1 per 14 hour day wages.

The Demand driven economy Clinton Developed has been turned into a demandless world of over production, as long term rates reacted to the tax cuts for the rich caused deficit projections and went to the high side of what was normal for current econ conditions, and destroyed investment in business, causing layoffs and worries about jobs rather than the Clinton world of folks enjoying the ability to spend a bit of money.

[AntiLempa]

3. Clinton and NAFTA

Mr. Clinton was the one that pushed through NAFTA and corporate managed free trade. Mr. Dean is pushing for the exact same thing. He says that NAFTA needs labor and environmental provisions. . .the environmental provisions are there and they aren't helping one bit.

What would you do to reform NAFTA? What about the WTO?

[papau]

16. The provisions needed will help - Japan like protection is not the answer

Japan is the model we do not want to follow.

Tax cuts for the rich, deficits forever, interest rates go to zero, but long term rates are always just a little too high to justify business investment, protection against imports so that the home population overpays, allowing corporations to transfer that money overseas via sales at lower prices.

Clinton - and Dean - are not wrong about free trade. Free Trade does help everyone. But like anything else, it must be done correctly.

The US is afraid of a world of unions, fair wages, enivironmental laws, labor laws - because the "United States" has become the "United Corporations" that are extremely short sighted and refuse to allow action that is for the greater good of all.

Dean must keep free trade - but get a union friendly world with labor laws and enivornmental laws as part of that world.

[AntiLempa]

20. labor and environmental laws are. . .

Labor and environmental laws are the opposite of free trade. Free trade is trade without government intervention. Environmental and labor laws would block certain countries from trading with the US. This isn't free trade.

What Clinton and Dean propose isn't Free Trade nor is it, as Dean calls it, Fair Trade. It's corporate managed trade with a twist.

[Muddleoftheroad]

8. American workers

Aren't being forced to take pay cuts. They have choices. If they wish to work for companies that are global, then they have to realize they compete on a global level.

It is the same in the U.S. If a company has an office in Maine and one in New York City, the people in Maine will earn scads less than those in the Big Apple.

[papau]

19. Global jobs get pay cuts? We only feed each other at a stable wage?

There is no way that simply being union friendly with labor laws and environmental laws will produce a worldwide single wage for any given job.

I agree cost of living will allow certain workers to accept less pay - and through the wonders of the market it will all work out - as location for work also dependeds on location of buyers because of cost of transport and service.

[jos]

4. At least get rid of chapter 11

Which permits an foreign corporation to sue a country for compensation as a result of health, welfare and safety regulations.

[MadHound]

7. We should repeal NAFTA and the WTO

These two treaties have had the effect of putting almost every worker in this country in competion with every other worker in the world, thus forcing the wages in this country down. This is just starting to take effect, and already we are seeing the consequences of these disasterous treaties. The "jobless recoveries as the norm" spin put out last week, the eviromental effects, both here and abroad, the loosening of worker safety regulations here and abroad, plus I think that this is also an ongoing factor in the weak economy that we are seeing now, with the prospect of a Great Depression spiral of deflation looming on the horizon.

Rather than pulling national wages down, instead work to pull up wages and working conditions internationally. I agree that the UN is the perfect vehicle for this move.

[placton]

9. Repeal and become protectionist

One big reason, if you read real news, for no jobs is the exporting of blue collar AND NOW WHITE COLLAR jobs to India and other places. I am a lawyer - and can now have cheap Indian workers do work for me (I have declined the opportunity). Soon, we will have few jobs left of any amount.

People must realize that there are few American corporations anymore - they have no loyalty to this country, just to $$$$$$$$$$$.

[Muddleoftheroad]

10. That's Good Mr. Buchanan

Let's cut America off from the entire world. Of course, there is one teensy problem. The world will still exist and could do just fine without us.

[AntiLempa]

11. So what is your solution?

Do you think that NAFTA and the WTO are what we need? Should they be reformed? Repealed? What is your take on the situation?

[Muddleoftheroad]

13. Global trade is not going away

The solution is to embrace it. To push our children to learn more about foreign cultures. To teach skills they need to compete -- language, math, etc. Not to sit on our hands and try to hold jobs hostage.

You don't need to legislate every solution. If you are annoyed that company X is exporting jobs, organize people to buy from company Y. Remember Buy American? It's working in other nations. Turkey just launched a new cola (oddly with Chevy Chase as a celeb spokesman) that appeals to nationalism and is anti-Coke and anti-Pepsi.

[WhoCountsTheVotes]

14. no one is talking about global trade going away, except for your strawman

We love global trade, we embrace global trade. We are opposed to an international system that is anti-democratic and pro-corporate. The US traded with Canada and Mexico LONG before there was a NAFTA.

Do you really think that we have no trade in North America until NAFTA? That's absurd.

Now explain why a corporation should be able to sue the USA because we have worker safety laws? Do you SUPPORT injuring workers?

[Muddleoftheroad]

21. We don't embrace global trade

Based on the threads of DU alone. And the anti-globalist protests.

Many folks don't want one single U.S. job exported. Too bad for them.

Yes, we had trade before, but NAFTA was an attempt at crating a trade zone to compete with the EU. As such it is needed. And if you have a trade ZONE, everyone in that zone needs to play by the same rules.

Perhaps the solution is to improve the laws of Mexico rather than damage the protections of the U.S.

[AntiLempa]

15. Good dodge

Noone is suggesting that we stop trading. The question deals specifically with NAFTA and the WTO.

What are your opinions of NAFTA and the WTO? What about my proposition for the UN?

[Muddleoftheroad]

18. Personally

I think we should have global free trade. Not just free trade zones like Europe does. But if the U.S. is to compete, NAFTA is needed.

Sure, the UN in theory is always a good place to air grievances. In practice, little happens.

[AntiLempa]

23. NAFTA is needed??

How is NAFTA needed? You mean Chapter 11 is needed? UPS needs the right to sue Canada for having a public post office? Metalclad needs the right to sue Mexico so they can pollute?

Or maybe NAFTA is needed so that Maytag leave the US to take advantage of Maquilladoras.

Please explain how NAFTA is needed. . .

[Muddleoftheroad]

24. Do you wish to compete?

Europe is still unifying under one code of laws and regulations to ease trade. NAFTA and the things that flow from it are needed to ease trade in North America so we are not left behind.

[AntiLempa]

25. My examples.

High paying US jobs becoming very low paying Mexican jobs. UPS and other corporations suing governments over barriers to trade such as environmental and labor laws. Wealth distribution becoming even more unequal. People working longer hours making less money. Families needing two or more jobs just to survive. Children realizing that they may very likely live at a lower standard then their parents.

This is the reality in which we live. If this is what NAFTA style competition does, then I don't want it. What we need to do is democratize the economic system, and the nost feasible way to do that, at least that I can see, is through the UN.

This will help to set a world standard for trade, not just national, continental, or hemispheric.

[WhoCountsTheVotes]

12. who said that? protecting America is good!

Surely you aren't saying we shouldn't protect America? We will continue to have international trade, on our terms.

[DrFunkenstein]

17. The Kerry Amendment

<>

According to Public Citizen, the amendment was a modest reform that guaranteed much-needed changes in the NAFTA Chapter 11 investment model in future trade agreements.

Under the model, foreign investors may file a claim in secret NAFTA tribunals to seek compensation when government public interest regulations in any way diminish the value of their investment.

In doing so, the amendment would have instructed U.S. trade negotiators to ensure that future investor provisions do not grant foreign investors rights beyond what the U.S. Constitution provides.

NAFTA's investment chapter (Chapter 11) contains a variety of new rights and protections for investors and investments in NAFTA countries.

If a company believes that a NAFTA government has violated these new investor rights and protections, it can initiate a binding dispute resolution process for monetary damages before a trade tribunal, offering none of the basic due process or openness guarantees afforded in national courts.

These so-called "investor-to-state" cases are litigated in the special international arbitration bodies of the World Bank and the United Nations, which are closed to public participation, observation and input.

A three-person panel composed of professional arbitrators listens to arguments in the case, with powers to award an unlimited amount of taxpayer dollars to corporations whose NAFTA investor privileges and rights they judge to have been impacted.

http://action.citizen.org/pc/issues/votes/?votenum=121&chamber=S&congress=1072

WASHINGTON - May 21 - Friends of the Earth expressed disappointment in the loss of an amendment to trade legislation that would have protected environmental standards from foreign investor lawsuits. The amendment, offered by Sen. John Kerry (D-Mass.), sought to address concerns with investment rules like NAFTA's Chapter 11 that allow foreign corporations to bring suits against environmental laws and regulations.

"By voting against the Kerry amendment, the Senate has paved the way for more backdoor corporate assaults on laws that protect our air, water and land," said David Waskow, Friends of the Earth's trade policy coordinator. "The Senate should be protecting the health and safety of Americans, not watching the backs of wealthy polluters who make big campaign contributions

http://www.commondreams.org/news2002/0521-13.htm

WASHINGTON - May 15 - Tuesday’s 98-0 passage of an amendment brought to the Senate floor by Sens. Max Baucus (D-Mont.) and Charles Grassley (R-Iowa) highlights the need for the Kerry "Chapter 11" amendment to the trade package coming later this week, Public Citizen’s Global Trade Watch said.

Unlike the amendment sponsored by Sen. John Kerry (D-Mass.), the Baucus-Grassley Amendment does not set the U.S. Constitution as the benchmark for the scope of property rights available to foreign investors in the United States.

"It’s nice they fixed a drafting error by passing the Baucus amendment," said Lori Wallach, director of Public Citizen’s Global Trade Watch. "Now the Senate needs to pass the Kerry Amendment to start fixing the NAFTA Chapter 11 problem."

The Kerry Amendment is based on U.S. Supreme Court rulings on expropriation in that it would guarantee that future trade agreements improve upon the NAFTA model and restrict such investment protection actions to only those cases where government action causes a physical invasion of property or the denial of all economic or productive use of that property.

The Kerry Amendment provides a government screen on future investor-to-state cases consistent with NAFTA’s Article 2103.6 for tax claims, and NAFTA Article 1415 for certain financial services measures. This procedure provides for a government review of a private company’s proposed case to ensure against the filing of frivolous suits.

http://www.commondreams.org/news2002/0515-04.htm

[AntiLempa]

26. Chapter 11

Chapter 11 was written as a hand out to corporations. The lawyers that are profitting the most from it also helped author it.

Conflict of interest?

[WhoCountsTheVotes]

22. How to argue with pro-NAFTA Democrats

Actually, maybe it's best not to. It's like changing the mind of a freeper. They usually know perfectly well that the point of NAFTA, CAFTA, the WTO, and the rest are anti-democratic - NAFTA supporters generally hate democracy, and don't believe in an egalitarian society.

Just like the Libertarians, they want to destroy our democratic "one-person, one-vote" system and replace it with a "one dollar, one vote" so rich people can have even more power.

Why are these people even in the Democratic party? Look no further than the DLC, the ultimate pro-corporate, pro-NAFTA, anti-union Democratic group. As a response to a lot of union victories in the 1970s (remember the coal strike in WV?) rich people shifted power to the Republicans, and proceeded to attack the Democratic party and the unions from the inside, with these "New Democrats" - at the same time they were attacking the unions in the UK with "New Labor".

Moles is what they are.

[Muddleoftheroad]

29. Moles, freepers, etc.

Boy, you are a nasty one aren't you?

I love it when people spout dogma and invective all at the same time. "Mine is the ONLY way. All who dare disagree are evil, freepers, morans, scum."

Too bad that isn't the case. In theory, our party has a big tent and lots of folks who won't agree with you.

Those who carry the torch like yours want to doom us to failure and obscurity simply because we dare disagree with one another.

[AntiLempa]

31. the point being made was. . .

The point that WCV was making was, at least the way I interpreted it, that a certain group of people don't respond to valid points that are brought up. Instead they stick to a script.

I challenged Harry Browne about Free Trade v. Fair Trade. Go to this website http://harrybrowne.org/Archives.htm and listen to the first hour of the July 19 show. He ignored just about everything I said and stuck to a script. He didn't even get the name of the organization right.

Corporate traders need to leave the script!

[Muddleoftheroad]

33. I have no script

Nor any scriptwriters other than moi. I'll try to take a look at the link when I get a chance.

Thanks.

[AntiLempa]

27. kick

shameless kick

[WhoCountsTheVotes]

28. first they ignore you, then they attack you

they you win. Is it a coincidence that after I posted thread after thread about Dean's support of NAFTA, his supporters are now mentioning his pro-reforming NAFTA platform at every turn? We're having an effect, and having Kucinich in this race is helping even more.

The neo-libs are strong in the Democratic party it seems.

[AntiLempa]

30. NeoLibs. . NeoCons

I was looking for some open dialogue, but all I was able to get were people telling us that we are trying to abolish trade.

I did notice the change in posting habits after Dean was called on his pro-NAFTA stance. I also noticed that reforming NAFTA is now excepted.

I really enjoyed when Kucinich called Dean out on his NAFTA stance.

[Muddleoftheroad]

34. All for open dialogue

On any topic.

[Pompitous_Of_Love]

32. Best means of reforming NAFTA?

Drive a wooden stake through its cold, dead heart.