With CAFTA Vote, Democrats Risk 'Anti-Trade' Label

[bufffbison]

http://www.rednova.com/news/display/?id=189005&source=r_technology

With CAFTA Vote, Democrats Risk 'Anti-Trade' Label
Jul. 28--WASHINGTON -- When the House of Representatives passed the controversial North American Free Trade Agreement with Mexico and Canada in 1993, 102 Democrats voted for it, including three Silicon Valley lawmakers.

A dozen years later, as the House prepared late Wednesday to vote on a trade deal with six Central American countries, fewer than 20 Democrats were expected to back it. No Silicon Valley representative has come out in favor of the pact and all may end up voting against it.

Such a vote would continue a dramatic slide in Democratic support for the most contentious trade legislation since NAFTA, a development that could hurt the party with Silicon Valley's high-tech industry and hinder its chances of regaining the White House.

"I think they are in danger of being viewed as anti-trade," said I.M. Destler, a public policy professor at the University of Maryland and an expert on trade politics.

Already Republicans are making that charge as both sides headed toward a too-close-to-call vote on the Central American Free Trade Agreement, known as CAFTA, a top priority of the Bush administration and the export-focused high-tech industry. But Democrats strongly reject the anti-trade label.

[napi21]

1. It won't take a whole year to prove who is right and who is wrong

on CAFTA. If, or when it turns out to have the bad effects of NAFTA, the pro voters will pay the price!

[Armstead]

2. Fuck that

The same people whpo are shippiung out jobs are complaining that Democrats risk being called "anti-trade."

How about the fact that those oursourcers are ANTI-AMERICAN?

[realFedUp]

3. Republicans push for corporate interests, most Dems want fair trade

There are a lot of flaws in this bill. Let
conservatives continue to use small soundbites
to smear and lie. Republicans depend on
uninformed Americans to push corporate
ownership without oversight here and in the
rest of the world.

[Tux]

12. Wait

Once mommy finds out that she needs a physician's prescribtion to get cold meds for a kid and health insurance isn't available, things will change.

[realFedUp]

17. and when mommy finds out she'll need a retinal scan for her Real I.D.

maybe she'll finally get mad.

[RoyGBiv]

4. That's fine ...

Democrats = Anti-trade, anti-war, anti-starvation, anti-torture, anti-totalitarianism

Republicans = Pro-trade, pro-torture, pro-police state, pro-absolute police power, pro-war, pro-fascism

I can live with the characterization.

[unlawflcombatnt]

15. One more for the Republicans

You forgot one for the Republicans. Pro-Slavery.

[RoyGBiv]

18. Mercy ...

Now there's an ironic twist worthy of broad repetition ...

Good one.

[IndianaGreen]

5. CAFTA is anti-worker

From an AFL-CIO alert:

Just like NAFTA, CAFTA does not include meaningful protections of workers’ rights—but it gives trade breaks to countries that violate workers’ rights. Highlight these points when you call your representative’s office:

CAFTA is based on the failed NAFTA, and it will expand NAFTA’s legacy of lost jobs, low wages and trampled workers’ rights to six more countries.

Under NAFTA and other failed U.S. trade policies, the U.S. trade deficit reached a record $600 billion last year as American companies relocated to take advantage of lower wages, weaker worker and environmental protections and improved access to the U.S. market. Even companies that didn’t destroy jobs used the threat of leaving the United States to break union organizing drives and win concessions at the bargaining table.

The NAFTA-related trade deficit cost U.S. workers nearly 900,000 net jobs through 2002—and the trade deficit only has grown since then, despite predictions by NAFTA supporters in the 1990s that the agreement would generate trade surpluses for another 15 years.

[union_maid]

6. Oh, don't call us anti-trade, Brer Fox!

How out of touch do you have to be to think that the majority of the people in this country are for free trade as we know it now? Go ahead, make that charge.

[1932]

7. J.Edwards won a lot of votes in Wisc. because of N-votes on trade agree-

ments.

IIRC, that was the only substantive policy debate during the primaries and the person who voted yes on all those agreements went down in the polls as that debate evolved and the candidate who voted no on a bunch of them went up in the polls.

The democrats could do a lot worse than be perceived as not participating in a race to the bottom of the wage scale for people who work for a living.

[Robbien]

8. The AFL-CIO sent a letter to Pelosi Monday threatening

she could not count on their support if Dems lost the CAFTA vote.

She lost 19 dem votes.

[unlawflcombatnt]

9. Who cares about an "anti-trade" label. Better than an "anti-labor" label

Why in the world would a Democrat worry about an "anti-trade" label? That's better than being labelled anti-labor, or anti-American. Maybe they'd like to be labelled "pro-slavery." I guess anything's better than being labelled "anti-trade," or horror of horrors -- "protectionist." No siree, it would be a fate worse than death to be labelled as a "protectionist," or someone who protects American workers.

unlawflcombatnt

[Ksec]

10. grass roots are unanimously against CAFTA

by a huge margin.

The thugs lose big on this issue. Thats a fact.

[Robbien]

14. Don't want to keep raining on your parade, but

the GOP did this exact same thing with the Medicare Prescription bill. All grassroots were against it. Delay held the House hostage until he got his votes.

A year later there is an election and we still have Bush and all those self same Repubs.

[Tux]

11. Liar!

"I think they are in danger of being viewed as anti-trade," said I.M. Destler

I may run against my Rep. I have it easy too. Just get a bunch of people together with newspaper reporters and local TV "journalists" and try to take the forum first. Ask the following:

Everyone here, raise your hand if this applies to you:

Healthcare costs you more now than before CAFTA.
College tuition is outside of your means even with grants.
Recent graduates, high school and college, can't find jobs that can pay the rent.
Illness makes your life harder to live.
Your kids are ill, hungry, and need better education.
You are divored since money became a hostile topic.
You lost your job after NAFTA passed.
You lost your job after NAFTA passed.
You lost your home since Bush took office.
And you feel that the American Dream is dead.

Mr. Lewis, defend your view that CAFTA will help Americans and their families.

[sadiesworld]

13. Promise?

[snowbear]

16. We'll just hire Lou Dobbs as our spokesman on the matter...

;) He'll do the job!

[deadparrot]

19. There's a difference, I think between fair/free trade and "free trade,"

My main problem is that CAFTA sacrfices human rights, while at the same time screwing American workers. It's a bum deal all around.

I do believe that companies have to operate, and to do that, sometimes they must upset one side or the other. I also believe that companies can treat foreign workers well. However, there's no upside to CAFTA--people in Central America get poorer while Americans lose jobs. It's simply a guise under which huge corporations can have unlimited power.

If NAFTA is any indication, CAFTA's impact (or lack thereof) will be bad all around.