CAFTA MARATHON....all evening til Midnight Vote! Rangel got Applause

[KoKo]

First time I've ever seen any Democratic Congressperson get applause on the floor of the House. He said...this could have been a better bill that would have helped everyone, til the President came down here and told everyone it's either who you're For or Who You're Against."

He said Democrats didn't have a part in this and so you have what we are forced to vote on tonigh and if we'd worked together we could have had something that would have worked for everyone and not the few."

C-Span I...but you need to "Mute" the Repugs unless you are tough enough to stand the spew. :puke:

Otherwise I'm in for watching this. This vote will show how popular Bush is...has he lost it...clinging to the edges...or it's FULL SPEED AHEAD on CAFTA. I know our NC Senators were hanging touch against Bush, the Repugs! But S.C. caved with arm twisting.

We will see......:shrug:

[Kerrytravelers]

1. I'm not sure how Schiff (D- CA) will vote.

[realFedUp]

3. I got an e-mail from Schiff saying he would not vote for CAFTA

and hope he sticks with his promise.

[Kerrytravelers]

22. Thank you for that! I didn't know!

[Greeby]

2. Err

Umm, just to point out, I think you mean the House. The Senate passed CAFTA a little while ago. 10 Dems voted for, and 10 pubs voted against.

Honestly, when you can muster 10 Repubs to vote against a Bushco bill, you have no excuse

[KoKo]

11. Yes...the House...sorry...will amend my post...Thanks for finding typo...

[Joanne98]

4. Give Charlie Norwood a hand! He was to scared to breathe.

Did you see his oxygen hose? God Bless him, even if he is a Republican.

[OzarkDem]

23. Charlie Norwood is a great guy

One of the few R's in Congress who deserves respect.

[OzarkDem]

30. Linder owns a factory in Mexico?

He shouldn't be allowed to vote on this bill, nevermind speak from the floor of the House.

[realFedUp]

5. Looked like Mr. Jefferson-Dem, La. voting for CAFTA

he drank the kool-aid.

[realFedUp]

6. Bill Thomas, bullhorn

louder doesn't make it righter....

Why doesn't the CA Dem party run someone
against this guy please.

[realFedUp]

7. Dem. Jim Moran on now.....nt

[realFedUp]

10. Moran's going to vote for this....

good luck Jim in your next race finding the money.

[ncrainbowgrrl]

13. I can't believe what I'm hearing.

Perhaps he just already DID find the money for the next race. :shrug:

[senseandsensibility]

12. OMG

What a jerk.

[realFedUp]

19. Henry Cuellar will vote for free and fair trade....well, it's not this bil

nothing free, nothing fair about it.

[realFedUp]

20. former chair of the trade committee Sander Levin

trade should level up, not level down.
Have to have right to bargain and associate,
this bill doesn't do that.

[OzarkDem]

8. Good Insider Coverage At GrowOhio.org

Cong. Sherrod Brown's web site. They're reporting on all the "behind the scenes" arm twisting by cons..

http://www.growohio.org/

[realFedUp]

Sirota-Which Democrats Will Face Serious Primaries Over CAFTA?

http://www.workingforchange.com/blog/index.cfm?mode=entry&entry=5A1AB28E-DD6E-E322-9F393DDB98E988CF

Which Democrats Will Face Serious Primaries Over CAFTA?

The labor movement has let it be known that it is no longer in the business of supporting Democrats who sell out America's middle class. That declaration follows a similar groundswell of disgust from the progressive community for Democrats who consistently undermine their courageous and honest colleagues in the Democratic Party. And that brings up the question: which Democrats are in danger of facing a serious and well-funded primary should they undermine their party and help President Bush pass the destructive, corporate-written Central American Free Trade Agreement (CAFTA)?

The easiest way to whittle down which Democrats are in real trouble would be to look at those Democrats who have previously slapped working people in the face. To be sure, that is a big list. So let's whittle it down further and confine it just to 2005. Which Democrats have undermined their party and put a boot in the eye of the ordinary American?

The best place to look is in the 73 Democrats who voted for the credit card industry-written bankruptcy bill - a bill roundly recognized as one of the biggest sellouts in recent times.

Of these 73 Democrats - including many New Democrats whom I have criticized - many have said they are voting against CAFTA, bucking the elitists at the Democratic Leadership Council. That is a good thing, and will likely spare these Democrats from serious electoral retribution.

Still, there are some left. Which again raises the question - which Democrats are really in trouble if they vote for CAFTA?

I would look for the Democrats who voted for the bankruptcy bill who represent safe Democratic districts, and have gotten comfortable sidling up to business lobbyists because they don't expect a primary. I would then hone it down further and look among these Democrats for those who represent districts where there is an on-the-ground infrastructure that could put up a serious primary challenge.

One of the prime targets, thus, is New York City, where the Working Families Party (WFP) exists just for this purpose. WFP has become a major force in New York state politics, using the state's cross-endorsement/fusion system to help Democrats win areas that Democrats have had trouble competing in. They have done this by sticking to core economic issues.

WFP, however, has also shown a willingness to take it to Democrats in safe districts who think they can sell out working people in New York. This is a muscular organization that doesn't screw around - and my bet is if there are New York City Democrats who vote for both the bankruptcy bill and CAFTA, those Democrats are going to find themselves face-to-face with a primary challenge.

For instance, there's Rep. Greg Meeks (D-NY). Meeks is playing footsie with the Bush administration and Corporate America, threatening to undermine Democrats and vote for CAFTA. And he not only voted for the Bankruptcy Bill, he actually signed a letter to Republican House Speaker Denny Hastert demanding the bankruptcy bill be passed immediately. This from a Congressman who represents a safe Democratic, working-class district.

If I were Meeks - or any other Democrat with a WFP-like force in my district - I would think very hard about whether I really want to sell my soul on the CAFTA vote. Remember, the powerful grassroots group Moveon.org showed no hesitation in going after Democrats who voted for the bankruptcy bill. That highlighted the fact that labor and the progressive movement in general seems just pissed enough (and rightly so) that the political dynamic is fundamentally changing for those Democrats who think they can walk all over working people with no consequences.

To be sure, if progressives are willing to hold Democrats feet to the fire, we will undoubtedly see a much more unified and effective Democratic Party in the future. That is ultimately the point – you can't hope to build a Democratic Party that stands for something, yet continue to coddle party members who stand for nothing other than selling out to the highest big-money bidder. And as much as Democrats may whine and cry, this new kind of bare-knuckled, tough, and populist progressive politics is a good thing for the Democratic Party in the long run.

Sources:
Labor says there will be consequences for Democrats who sell out America on CAFTA:
http://www.workingforchange.com/blog/index.cfm?mode=entry&entry=56C4B3CA-D4D2-5B79-E51520830A61C624
The 73 Democrats who voted for the Bankruptcy Bill:
http://clerk.house.gov/evs/2005/roll108.xml
New Democrats announced they oppose CAFTA:
http://www.davidsirota.com/2005/05/major-cafta-victory-where-is-dem-whip.html
New Democrats buck the elitists at the DLC:
http://www.workingforchange.com/blog/index.cfm?mode=entry&entry=1C148B00-B99A-67B4-D0CEE576298A99FE
The Working Families Party:
http://www.workingfamiliesparty.org/about.html
Working Families Party has become a serious force in New York politics:
http://www.nysun.com/article/11345
Democratic Rep. Meeks threatening to vote for CAFTA after voting for Bankruptcy Bill:
http://www.newsday.com/news/printedition/nation/ny-usmeek174347438jul17,0,7658669.story?coll=ny-nationalnews-print
Meeks signed letter to Hastert demanding passage of Bankruptcy Bill:
http://www.tnr.com/etc.mhtml?pid=2584
Moveon.org has shown no hesitation in going after sellout Democrats:
http://www.democrats.com/node/4238

[senseandsensibility]

9. Right now what is your best guess about

the probability of passage? I have to admit to not being up to speed on this issue, I am embarrassed to say. I just assumed it would pass, like bankruptcy and everything else. You've given a little hope that it's questionable. Of course I called my Congressman's office to urge a no vote, but he's a liberal Dem with a great labor record, so it wasn't even necessary. Anyway, I'd appreciate your thoughts. And thanks for posting this.

[Armstead]

14. Moran -- Disappointing sell out

I wonder who bought his vote.

[realFedUp]

15. CAFTA's Debt Trap

http://globalpolitician.com/articledes.asp?ID=836&cid=1&sid=45

CAFTA's Debt Trap
Aldo Caliari - 6/6/2005

Criticism of the Central American Free Trade Agreement (CAFTA) currently being considered by the U.S. Congress has focused heavily on concerns that the treaty would devastate Central American farmers who would be forced to compete with heavily subsidized U.S. agribusiness.1 In addition, many Central Americans fear that the deal would perpetuate a low-road approach to development based on low wages and lax environmental enforcement and undermine government authority to ensure basic services and access to medicines. These are all valid concerns, but there is yet another danger posed by CAFTA that deserves greater attention.

Buried in the technical language of the investment chapter of the agreement are rules that would make it more difficult for the six nations that have signed the trade deal with the United States to escape heavy debt burdens or to prevent or recover from debt crises. The investment provisions of CAFTA, like other deals such as the 1994 North American Free Trade Agreement, are based on the argument that strong protections for private foreign investors will help encourage investments needed for economic growth. To this end, they require governments to comply with a long list of investor protections and grant private foreign investors the right to sue governments for damages if these obligations are violated.

For example, governments are required to treat foreign investors at least as favorably as domestic ones. This principle is known as "national treatment." They must also ensure what is called "most favored nation" treatment, meaning that they cannot discriminate against (or give special preferences to) the investors of one country that is a party to the agreement without granting the same treatment to investors of other parties to the agreement. These rules mean that governments cannot favor domestic interests (or investors from a particular country) even if doing so would support social goals or other national interests.

The NAFTA investor protections cover a sweeping array of types of ownership interests, including loans and securities. 2 But the CAFTA rules go even further by extending the application of such protections to sovereign debt. Under NAFTA, sovereign debt is explicitly excluded.3 It is worth noting that the explicit exclusion comes after the use of the words "for greater certainty" which could be construed as meaning that the explicit exclusion was not necessary in the light of the other wording.

This is not the first time that a trade deal has covered sovereign debt. In the 2003 U.S.-Chile Agreement, specific principles on investment are explicitly made applicable to sovereign debt. The U.S.-Chile FTA contains a broad definition of investment4 that follows the standard adopted by the U.S. in its most recent BIT Model.5 This definition generally includes "bonds, debentures, loans and other debt instruments"6 In what represents a significant departure from NAFTA, the treaty explicitly makes the provisions applicable to sovereign debts issued by the Chilean government.7 These same rules are included in CAFTA.8

The rest of this article explains how the extension of CAFTA investment rules to sovereign debt places huge constraints on the ability of indebted countries to exit from a debt crisis or to protect the basic needs of its citizens.

continued

[realFedUp]

16. CAFTA's corporate giveaways - Hightower

http://www.journal-advocate.com/Stories/0,1413,120~7821~2898747,00.html

CAFTA's corporate giveaways

By JIM HIGHTOWER, Syndicated columnist

Why is there never any truth in packaging when Washington politicos deliver special-interest goodies to their corporate backers?
When they delivered a multibillion-dollar tax giveaway to drug companies, for example; they didn't call it the Pharmaceutical Phreeloader Phund, but instead, branded it the "American Jobs Creation Act." And, now, here come the Bushites with another bundle of big corporate favors disguised as a boon for working folks. CAFTA, they call it - the Central American Free Trade Agreement.

Despite its sprightly acronym, this giveaway is neither free nor about trade. It extends the job-busting, environment-exploiting provisions of NAFTA to six more Latin American countries, and most dangerously, it empowers global corporations to overturn laws and regulations that they don't like in all the countries involved. It literally usurps democratic sovereignty - yet you'd never know this from the way CAFTA is being packaged and sold.








The debate in Washington and in the media is all about how many jobs will be created or lost, with the corporate forces making phantasmagoric claims that divert the real debate that should be happening.

The U.S. Chamber of Commerce, for example, issued a "study" asserting that CAFTA would be a job machine for U.S. workers. First of all, the "study" itself is a fairy tale, based on the absurd assumption that these six mostly poor nations will suddenly devote a third of their entire economic activity to buying stuff from us. It also fails to count any of the jobs the United States will lose due to our corporations moving there to make stuff to ship back for sale here.

More importantly, though, the debate should be on what CAFTA really gives away to global corporations, which is our very democracy. This astonishing usurpation of power is why Bush and corporate lobbyists are pushing so furiously for this so-called "trade" deal.

[realFedUp]

17. Howard Coble says no...

talking about the seamstresses in his district
losing jobs.

[Armstead]

18. Rep. Coble R- NC

Voting No.

God this is topsy turvey.

The strongest argument for it being made is "It's bad but it could be worse."

[ncrainbowgrrl]

21. Coble is speaking as a North Carolinian, not as a (R) or (D)

And I am glad to see him representing the views of his constituents on this issue.

[realFedUp]

24. AP: U.S. Blocked Release of CAFTA Reports

http://www.guardian.co.uk/uslatest/story/0,1282,-5107143,00.html

AP: U.S. Blocked Release of CAFTA Reports

Wednesday June 29, 2005 7:16 PM

By LARRY MARGASAK

Associated Press Writer

WASHINGTON (AP) - The Labor Department worked for more than a year to maintain secrecy for studies that were critical of working conditions in Central America, the region the Bush administration wants in a new trade pact.

The contractor hired by the department in 2002 to conduct the studies has become a major opponent of the administration's proposed Central American Free Trade Agreement, or CAFTA.

The government-paid studies concluded that countries proposed for free-trade status have poor working environments and fail to protect workers' rights. The department dismissed the conclusions as inaccurate and biased, according to government and contractor documents reviewed by The Associated Press.

The Senate Finance Committee, which approved the agreement by a voice vote Wednesday, sent it to the full Senate for consideration this week or after the Independence Day recess.

The contractor is the International Labor Rights Fund.

In a summary of its findings, the organization wrote, ``In practice, labor laws on the books in Central America are not sufficient to deter employers from violations, as actual sanctions for violations of the law are weak or nonexistent.''

continued

[realFedUp]

25. www.stopcafta.org

http://www.stopcafta.org/

Grassroots CAFTA Opponents Mobilize for Final Vote

Stop CAFTA Coalition Press Release
July 27th, 2005

7/27/2005 12:18:00 PM

WASHINGTON, July 27 /U.S. Newswire/ -- Citing the possibility of a vote on the US-Dominican Republic-Central America Free Trade Agreement (CAFTA) in the House of Representatives, opponents played up the widespread rejection of CAFTA throughout the Americas, and criticized attempts by Republicans to demonize CAFTA opponents.

"For more then three years the Stop CAFTA Coalition has been waging a battle against this so-called "free" trade agreement, along with our partners in El Salvador, Nicaragua, Guatemala, Costa Rica Honduras, and the Dominican Republic," said Tom Ricker of the Quixote Center. "The House leadership has called for a vote this week, but we believe that the overwhelming grassroots opposition to CAFTA will be enough to stop it."

"From calling Representatives, to phone banking in swing districts to holding rallies and sit-ins and educational events, we are resolved as ever to fight to the last minute before the vote," said Burke Stansbury of the Committee in Solidarity with the People of El Salvador (CISPES).

The Stop CAFTA Coalition and other national networks have been targeting undecided members of the U.S. Congress all week. On Tuesday, activists in New York held a rally demanding that Rep. Gregory Meeks vote against CAFTA, while in Washington DC the Coalition joined members of Congress to speak out against CAFTA on the West Lawn of the Capital. Local coalitions are also mobilizing for direct actions, rallies, and lobbying in places like San Francisco, Los Angeles, Portland, and Minneapolis.

The Coalition also denounced attempts by Republicans to portray CAFTA opponents as violent, Marxist demagogues, specifically attempts to scare members by constantly referring to political leaders such as Daniel Ortega and Hugo Chavez. "The people of Central America reject CAFTA," said Ricker, "and the attempts by Republicans to characterize the opposition as fringe ideologues is downright ridiculous."

continued

[LittleClarkie]

26. So how does this work?

The Senate passed it. Now the House has to as well?

I don't know why I thought that stuff starts in the House and goes to the Senate always. It can go either way?

Sorry, never did pay much attention before this year.

[realFedUp]

29. John Linder, R-Georgia

owns a company in Mexico...

[LittleClarkie]

34. Well, that was a non-sequitor

I wasn't completely clear on how bills work their way through Congress. Unless John Linder created the procedure, I don't see how your answer helps.

Bills can start in either house and then have to be voted on in the other? Somehow, I'd assumed CAFTA had already been through the House when it got voted on in the Senate.

[Armstead]

27. "CAFTA is NAFTA's ugly cousin"

And that was a republican talking. Walter Jones R, North Carolina.

[realFedUp]

28. Ted Jones from NC says no

tired of the manufacturing jobs going overseas...

[realFedUp]

31. Jim McDermott up now....he won't vote for it

Bush went to Republican caucus and said we had a
"marvelous" year....our trade deficit is the largest
in history, says McDermott. Will this fix it?

I'd say no.

[cornermouse]

32. Ever notice how much they have in common with vampires?

They keep sucking the life out of everything and everyone. They're insatiable. And they always do their dirty deeds around midnight.

[realFedUp]

33. they figure it won't get into papers tomorrow if it's so late

and people won't be watching.

[realFedUp]

35. Kevin Brady....brings up Morocco again...Texan will vote for it

Why would we refuse this trade agreement if
we agreed to trade with Morocoo....

same ole pap...

[Idioteque]

36. CAFTA Debate -- Open Thread

The House is just finishing debate on the rule to bring CAFTA to the floor. The Republican rule allows for a measly 1 hour of debate. NAFTA on the other hand got 8 hours of debate.

Debate on the agreement itself will begin shortly.

Edit: There are going to be a few stacked votes right now. They might decide to go for the medical malparactice bill first...it's up to the Republicans.

Most likley, the CAFTA debate will probably be later tonight.

[ulysses]

37. here we go. n/t

[Rainscents]

38. I'm not watching TV, so please let us know.

[arcos]

39. Any idea of the time of the vote? nt

[Tux]

40. Sometime tonight

But not sure when exactly.

http://www.vote-smart.org

Check to see how your Congress Rep voted. I know mine will vote for it just like both my Senetors. Bastards, one and all.

[arcos]

43. Thanks! nt

[Robbien]

46. Delay is going to hold an all night arm twisting session and no one leaves

until he get his votes.

Did you sign the petition Congressman Pellono will be taking with him to the vote tonight?

http://www.pallonefornewjersey.com/petition/CAFTA

[arcos]

48. No, I'm not American...

I'm Costa Rican :P

[Joanne98]

41. Lou Dobbs said midnight!

[arcos]

42. Thanks! nt

[gizmo1979]

44. They're expecting a midnight vote.

we all know how those turn out.

[wli]

45. oh crap

That doesn't sound good.

[Armstead]

47. I think the games are about to start

Taking a vote to take it up....something like that.

[arcos]

49. kick nt

[Armstead]

50. William Jefferson -- First Democratic sell out

Defending this rag. Arrgh.

[Idioteque]

51. Rangel keeps yielding to Repubs...Shaw keeps yielding to Dems

It's like their trying to out-do each other.

[wildflower]

52. Thanks, got it on CSPAN1 now;

Ron Lewis from KY on.

"More opportunities for companies to sell their products to new customers..."

"This agreement levels the playing field...80% of CAFTA imports already enter the U.S. duty-free..."

[Tux]

56. Go, Ron

Spew that shit. Sell what products? The ones made in China? KY can't export much since they dumped family tobacco growers for corporate farms, KY Best cigs won't sell well even in BG, KY; and he does imply that we'll all be rich from this.

Fuck it. He and Senators will be voted out even if I have to run for Rep.

[realFedUp]

53. maybe a mod should combine these threads

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=1962883&mesg_id=1962883

[wildflower]

54. Republican Walter Jones from N.C. on now...he's *against* CAFTA. n/t

[Greeby]

55. Walter "Freedom Fries" Jones up

Defintely opposes

[realFedUp]

57. well, the paramilitaries will love this bill

more American companies to get money from....

[realFedUp]

58. C.L. Butch Otter, NY cannot flim flam

People won't forget NAFTA and the results from
that....which hasn't performed. Says put your job
on the line, if you vote for CAFTA and your promises
don't come true, quit.

Well, there's some backbone.

[ncrainbowgrrl]

62. From Idaho, IIRC.

n/t

[realFedUp]

65. thanks....nt

[wildflower]

64. He is good.

Former salesman, and you can tell. Sounded like he got some applause, too.

-wildflower

[Idioteque]

59. Butch Otter (R-ID): "If you support CAFTA, put your job on the line!" n/t

[Greeby]

60. C.L "Butch" Otter R - Idaho

Telling the pro-CAFTA lot to put their jobs on the line, defintely opposes

[Armstead]

61. Butch Otter, republican from Idaho calling out supporters

Telling them to resign in two years if it doesn't succeed.

Gosh it's strange to be cheering on Repubs.

[realFedUp]

63. Chocola will vote for it...nt

[realFedUp]

66. Becerra says no....nt

[Greeby]

67. Xavier Becerra D - CA

Against, using a Reagan quote to make his point

[realFedUp]

68. A whole crop of Ways and Meanies wanting CAFTA

Bill Thomas must have promised poison lattes for
those who didn't vote for this bill.

[realFedUp]

69. Ryan from Wisconsin-yes

someone run against this bloho...please

[Greeby]

70. Paul Ryan - R - Wisconsin

Voting for it would seem

[realFedUp]

71. saying this is the strongest trade agreement brought to Senate

no it's not. Does nothing to protect worker's rights.

[realFedUp]

72. Ron Paul from Texas strongly opposes CAFTA....nt

[realFedUp]

75. says this bill is unConstitutional, threat to national sovereignty

[Robbien]

87. He is the one behind the SOB U SOB eignt hundred number

being pushed around DU the last couple of days.

Ron Paul has gotten a lot of grassroots people active on this issue.

[ncrainbowgrrl]

73. Ron Paul (R-TX): No

[realFedUp]

76. says this bill is not free trade, one of the best opposition speakers

on this bill.

[Robbien]

88. His group is the one which got me pushing the issue for the

two days. His group is paying for that 800 number we've all been using.

[Greeby]

74. Ron Paul

Go get em, Ron

[ncrainbowgrrl]

Rep. Shaw has his coat unbuttoned- he looks TIRED.

Interesting.

[realFedUp]

79. well, these guys get a whole month off soon....

they can stand up once in awhile and do the
business of the American people.

[realFedUp]

77. ugh, Dan Burton....will vote for it...nt

[Greeby]

78. Dan Burton R - Indiana

Yes, I'm guessing

[realFedUp]

81. practically said there would be armegeddon if this bill isn't passed.

gads, what drama queens.

[realFedUp]

82. LOL...Rangel kidding Dan Burton....nt

[realFedUp]

84. proves anyone can run for and win Congress....nt

[ncrainbowgrrl]

86. That was great.

He made me :rofl: at the search for WMDs...

[Tux]

83. If it passes

And the layoffs begin, they will see hell on Earth when they are voted out faster than the Flash running to a strip club.

[Robbien]

91. They are betting on the fact people will be too busy putting food

on the table to actually get out and vote.

[sadiesworld]

80. At least the stream of turncoat dems has dried up...

I don't think I could bear to listen to another one.

God, I hate Dan Burton. :puke:

[Greeby]

85. Stephanie Tubbs-Jones, defintely no

:yourock:

[Greeby]

89. Earl Pomeroy D- ND

Looks like no.

And hes on fire :woohoo:

[TheFarseer]

93. yeah, wow

that was a great speech. Thank god for people like that. Too bad I don't think there's enough of them.

[realFedUp]

90. wow, who was that guy? Let's save these jobs for Americans!

yeah, and quit using the world's people as slave laborers
for American companies.

[realFedUp]

92. Jim Koble....yada, yada, yada...yes nt

[ncrainbowgrrl]

94. Locking due to size- let's continue in a new thread!

New thread over here!
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x1963154