Why my rep voted for CAFTA - it almost makes sense

[TheFarseer]

http://www.house.gov/apps/list/press/ne03_osborne/072805CAFTA.html

“Given the opportunities DR-CAFTA provides to open markets for key Nebraska exports, including agricultural products and pharmaceuticals, after careful consideration, I voted to implement the trade agreement. For 20 years, the United States has been exchanging goods with our trading partners in the Dominican Republic and Central America under disadvantageous conditions. Currently about 99 percent of the region’s agricultural exports enter the United States duty-free, while U.S. goods exported to the DR-CAFTA countries face significant tariffs. The DR-CAFTA agreement levels the playing field and provides increased access to new markets. Estimates indicate that the agreement will result in a significant trade balance for U.S. exports of agricultural goods.”

OK, he's not my rep anymore but still the same state and I have voted for the guy twice. If this is true, his vote makes more sense, at least for a district with almost no manufacturing anyway. What do you guys think?

[Kerrytravelers]

1. One reason to vote for it... thousands of reasons to vote against it.

[seabeyond]

2. they said the same to convince us of nafta. has it worked for us?

no

[bullimiami]

3. exactly. look at what nafta has done to mexico.

now just add central america.

more exploitation of desperate workers.

[acmavm]

4. Let's see. The guy did something his constituents, hell even the repubs

and libertarians didn't want, becausd even they have seen the disasrtrous effects of NAFTA on this country since that boondoggle passed. But what the hell, he trots out the same tired, trite, and absolutely bogus excuse for sticking it to the American worker, all of a sudden some people can 'see why he voted for it'.

There are 15 people who claim to be democrats who betrayed the working people in this country. Not just members of our party, I'm talking about all the stiffs out there who are struggling to support a family under conditions that are already stacked against us.

Assholes like these 15 traitors didn't vote the way they did 'for their constituency'. They saw something in it for themselves and ran with it.

[TheFarseer]

10. but but but

Did anyone even read the part about they had tarrifs on our stuff and we didn't have tarrifs on theirs? Now I am re-thinking my logic and thinking why didn't we just strong-arm them into taking off their tarrifs. Surely the great Geore W can do some arm twisting on a few banana republics.

To everybody, I never once said CAFTA was good. I called Tom and wrote him repeatedly to vote against this abomination.

[converted_democrat]

14. That argument still does not hold water..........

The tariffs have little to do with the fact that they can't afford our products. Dropping tariffs still does not make our products affordable to them.

[converted_democrat]

5. B.S..........CAFTA is bad all the way around.............

Very few countries can afford American goods. It is going to make our trade deficits worse. The only group that will benefit from CAFTA are the companies that move south for the cheaper labor, or cheaper raw product. We export little of our ag products to those countries because they can raise the same product for much less. And forget about them being able to afford our farm implements, our own farmer can't even afford them. Also, this will be bad for farmers in the long run because our market will be flooded with cheap grain from the southern countries, driving our farmers out of business. This is bad all the way around unless you are moving your factory or business down there for cheap labor, or cheaper raw goods.

BTW-- Don't twist your own logic in a pretzel to explain this away. This guy made a bad decision and is trying to make people "okay" with it, don't let it happen. Let him know it's bad, and why.

[FloridaPat]

6. We send so much agricultural products to Domincan Republic

and Central America that it will show up on the trade balance? Why am I having trouble believing that. And why would their stuff come in without a tariff but ours has a very high teriff? Last year we imported more food than we exported. Soon our beef industry will be dead to exporting with Mad Cow disease being found. Florida citrus will be dead in a couple of years because land is becoming so rare and expensive. Houses bring in a lot more than oranges.

[dcfirefighter]

7. US agriculture

is heavily subsidized - central american agriculture is not. Farmers in these countries will not be able to compete with US farmers, and will have no option but to go to work at the factory.

Houses bring in more than oranges, but they require more expenditures: schools, public safety, roads, etc; especially in florida where suburban sprawl seems to be the norm.

If we can convince people that building houses on 1/2 acre lots is insane, we can retain decent agriculture in this country. As it is, farmers are selling their land and retiring on the windfall profit they make as soon as their land is zoned residential.

At the densities of 'livable' urban neighborhoods, and less the 50% of urban land used for the automobile, 90% of the country's population could live on less than 30,000 sq mi or roughly 1% of the land area of the lower 48. This would reduce our energy use for transport by an order of magnitude, our residential energy use by at least half, and leave plenty of space for agriculture and water & air cleaning wilderness. Most importantly, it would allow agriculture to be located relatively near cities. Currently urban & suburban areas use a little over 6% of land. The vast majority of our agriculture lands are used to grow fodder for meat-producing animals.

[converted_democrat]

9. I agree with you to a point.......

but I think your wrong about farmers(from the southern countries)having no choice but to go to a factory job. I agree in the short term this may happen, but in the long run as soon as they figure out that they can get good money(to them) for grains, you will see co-ops form to farm, wrecking our grain markets.

[TheFarseer]

11. We have alot more to fear from Brazil

than Honduras as far as wrecking our grain markets. There is just too much land in production in the world. Parts of the U.S. that were never intended to grow corn are doing exactly that and vast tracts of land in Brazil where a rain forest once was are being destroyed to grow corn. Brazil is why the set-aside program quit working in the 90's. Now I simply don't know what the answer is. We're all grasping at straws out here. I just thank God the Democrats are around to keep farmers afloat with subsidies.

[converted_democrat]

13. I agree to a point..........

But let's not get issues confused or muddied. CAFTA is bad for Americans, period. Unless you own a company that benefits from cheaper raw goods, or cheaper labor, CAFTA is bad for you.

[converted_democrat]

8. We send very little to those countries, very little......

See my post above.

[Lannes]

12. Here is a good resource on CAFTA and NAFTA

I was against both myself.

"TRADING AWAY RIGHTS
The Unfulfilled Promise of NAFTA's Labor Side Agreement"


http://www.hrw.org/reports/2001/nafta/


"DR-CAFTA Falls Short on Workers’ Rights"

http://www.hrw.org/english/docs/2005/07/27/usint11493.htm