CAFTA - Trick or Treaty

Date: Wednesday, July 27, 2005 5:49 PM

JOB DESTRUCTION NEWSLETTER

by Rob Sanchez
July 27, 2005 No. 1298

Congress might vote on CAFTA tonight or tomorow, and it will be a close vote. After this article I provide a list of Congress-critters and where they stand on CAFTA. You may want to consider calling your representative, especially if he/she is undecided. This vote will be very partisan - Democrats are expected to vote no, and Republicans will vote yes. Convincing even a handful of Republicans might lead to the defeat of this monster, and it's very important to make sure that the Democrats don't waiver or to lose on purpose by not voting.

To get the phone numbers of your representatives go to:

http://www.house.gov/or
http://www.numbersusa.com/congressinfo/

The NumbersUSA directory is easier to use but either way, the important thing is that you make sure that your representative understands that you demand a no vote on CAFTA.

Here are some of the important reasons to oppose CAFTA:

-- JOBS --
CAFTA will make it easier for American companies to outsource industries to cheap labor countries in Central America. This means more workers in the U.S. will lose jobs.

-- ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION --
CAFTA hurts Central American farmers which in turn will fuel their desire to enter the U.S. illegally in search of jobs.

-- POLITICAL STABILITY --
Proponents of CAFTA claim that it will help these countries stay democratic because it will enrich their workers, but it may have the opposite effect. Central America could destabilize when farmers lose their jobs as Mexico did when NAFTA was signed. When these workers are forced to work in American owned sweatshops, or to immigrate to the U.S. to avoid starvation, they will resent it, and their anger will be directed at the U.S. The poverty and desperation caused by the treaty could inspire Communist insurgencies in these countries.

-- NONIMMIGRANT GUEST WORKERS --
CAFTA doesn't presently have a guest-worker visa, but it could be inserted at any time if a WTO tribunal decided that the United States is in violation of GATS Mode which mandates that countries must allow for the free flow of "natural persons".

-- NATIONAL SOVEREIGNTY THREAT --
We fought a revolution against the British over taxation-without-representation but now CAFTA threatens to reverse the rights our forefathers had to fight and die for. CAFTA will allow international tribunals to make decisions that affect not only our immigration policies but also our internal politics. A classic example of tribunals in action was when a Canadian company under NAFTA sued the state of California when legislators decided to remove MTBE from gasoline (MTBE is a known carcinogen that pollutes groundwater).

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

http://www.prospect.org/web/page.ww?section=root&name=ViewWeb&articleId=10049

Trick or Treaty
CAFTA looks dead -- but it might come to life in a Medicare-style midnight surprise.
By Mark Leon Goldberg
Web Exclusive: 07.27.05

An eleventh-hour attempt by the Republican House leadership to save the unpopular Dominican Republic-Central American Free Trade Agreement (CAFTA) trade pact has apparently shifted into overdrive. If rumors abuzz on Capitol Hill are to be believed, members of Congress who seek CAFTAs defeat had best stock up on No-Doz and Red Bull. And if youre an undecided Republican, some hockey pads wouldnt hurt either.

Several sources have told the Prospect that they believe that House GOP leaders are planning to hold a vote on CAFTA at midnight sometime this week, hoping that enough anti-CAFTA members wont stick around for the late-night fete. As CAFTA's opponents currently constitute a majority in the House, the GOP leadership intends to steal a victory by coercing, cajoling, or simply outlasting the CAFTA opponents.

After being stalled for more than a year, CAFTA passed the Senate in a 54-to-45 vote last month. As it stands, about 180 Democrats and 28 to 30 Republicans solidly oppose the deal, which is essentially the extension of the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) to Central American countries and the Dominican Republic. That leaves about two dozen or so undecided Republicans who have previously indicated their opposition, but are nonetheless swayable. If we are to believe Arizona Republican Jim Kolbe, who told Washington Trade Daily that the GOP leadership would "twist some Republican arms until they break in a thousand pieces," coercion will be used at least as much as carrots to see this bill through.

For dissenting Republicans who wish to keep their arms (or subcommittee chairmanships), a late-night roll call would provide an excuse to duck out of casting a vote that may be popular at home but would embarrass the leadership. For their part, House Democrats would be forced into a war of attrition as they wait -- and wait, and wait -- for the vote to be called. After all, CAFTA neednt win the support of a majority of Congress to pass, only a majority of those present at the time of a vote once a quorum of 218 members is established.

Signs of this last-minute legislative strategy became apparent on Monday, July 25, when U.S. Trade Secretary Rob Portman -- flanked by three southern Republicans who had formerly opposed the treaty -- called a press conference to announce a side deal on textiles. The congressmen were from textile-producing districts in Alabama and South Carolina; to win their support, Portman hammered out a last-minute deal that would, among other things, exclude Chinese fabric from the pocket linings of trousers produced in CAFTA countries, thereby increasing the share of American cotton in, say, Nicaraguan pants. Aaron Neville would be proud.

To be sure, not all southern Republicans from textile-producing states think with their pants. Some, like North Carolinas Walter Jones, consider themselves answerable to a higher authority and have staked out a principled opposition to the deal. "I came to Washington to do what is right -- from the teachings of my Lord and for the people of Eastern North Carolina," Jones said in a press release. "I think we all want trade with the countries of Central America. But trade will not work unless it's fair -- fair for Central American and fair for American workers. This trade agreement is flawed."

But flawed policy and poorly written bills havent stopped the GOP leadership from ramming through unpopular legislation in the past. Indeed, if Republican leaders do wait until the wee hours of the morning to call a vote on CAFTA theyd simply be replicating the arm-twisting used to secure the passage of the Medicare prescription-drug benefit by one vote in 2003. Back then, as connoisseurs of Tom DeLays ethics scandals will recall, the majority leader used an unprecedented three-hour extension to the 15-minute roll-call vote to visit a number of recalcitrant GOP backbenchers and make them offers they wouldnt refuse.

Given that CAFTAs future is not clear, a late-night roll-call vote on CAFTA would present DeLay and company with a similar opportunity. Most of the treaty's Democratic detractors -- particularly in the Congressional Hispanic Caucus -- have held firm in their opposition and will do so at least until the treaty is amended to include meaningful labor and environmental obligations. Other pro-labor Democrats, like Maines Michael Michaud, steadfastly oppose CAFTA for fear that it will hasten the flight of local manufacturing jobs.

But as the clock nears 12, the question remains: Can the rest of CAFTAs opponents resist the temptation to fold in the midnight hour?

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

MOST REPUBLICANS PLAN TO VOTE YES (they are not listed here).

REPUBLICANS UNDECIDED BUT WHO ARE LEANING "YES"

Akin (MO)
Boozman (AR)
Culberson (TX)
Cunningham (CA)
Dent (PA)
Gilchrest (MD)
Gohmert (TX)
Granger (TX)
Istook (OK)
Kingston (GA)
Leach (IA)
Jerry Lewis (CA)
Lucas (OK)
Pearce (NM)
Poe (TX)
Price (Tom) (GA)
Putnam (FL)
Schwarz (MI)
Shadegg (AZ)
Shuster (PA)
Terry (NE)

REPUBLICANS WHO ARE UNDECIDED BUT WHO ARE LEANING "NO"

Aderholdt (AL)
Bonner (AL)
Brown-Waite (FL)
Coble (NC)
Foley (FL)
Gutnecht (MN)
McCotter (MI)
Simmons (CT)

REPUBLICANS WHO SAY THEY ARE "UNDECIDED" AND NOT LEANING

Bartlett (MD)
Bilirakis (FL)
Blackburn (TN)
Boehlert (NY)
Brown (SC)
Camp (MI)
Crenshaw (FL)
Mario Diaz-Balart (FL)
Duncan (TN)
Ehlers (MI)
Emerson (MO)
Everett (AL)
Feeney (FL)
Fitzpatrick (PA)
Forbes (VA)
Franks (AZ)
Gerlach (PA)
Gibbons (NV)
Gillmor (OH)
Gingrey (GA)
Green (WI)
Hefley (CO)
Hobson (OH)
Hoekstra (MI)
Kuhl (NY)
Mack (FL)
McHugh (NY)
McMorris (WA)
Gary Miller (CA)
Jeff Miller (FL)
Murphy (PA)
Musgrave (CO)
Osborne (NE)
Petri (WI)
Pickering (MS)
Rohrabacher (CA)
Sensenbrenner (WI)
Sodrel (IN)
Upton (MI)
Walden (OR)
Walsh (NY)
Wamp (TN)
C. Weldon (PA)
Whitfield (KY)
Don Young (AK)

REPUBLICANS WHO DECLINED TO ANSWER NATIONAL JOURNAL SURVEY

Buyer (IN)
Garrett (NJ)
Issa (CA)
Nunes (CA)
Platts (PA)
Regula (OH)
Tiberi (OH)
Turner (OH)
Wolf (VA)

REPUBLICANS FOR WHOM THERE WAS NO RESPONSE BY PRESS TIME

Alexander (LA)
Baker (LA)
Bishop (UT)
Burgess (TX)
Capito (WV)
Chabot (OH)
Jo Ann Davis (VA)
Deal (GA)
Fossello (NY)
Gallegly (CA)
Graves (MO)
Hall (TX)
Hostettler (IN)
Jenkins (TN)
Jindal (LA)
Kelly (NY)
LoBiondo (NJ)
Manzullo (IL)
Mica (FL)
C. Miller (MI)
Ney (OH)
Peterson (PA)
Pombo (CA)
Renzi (AZ)
Reynolds (NY)
Hal Rogers (KY)
Ed Royce (CA)
Saxton (NJ)
Sherwood (PA)
C. Smith (NJ)
Stearns (FL)
Sweeney (NY)
Thornberry (TX)
Dave Weldon (FL)
C.W. Young (FL)

MOST DEMOCRATS PLAN TO VOTE "NO" (they are not listed here)

THE VERY FEW DEMOCRATS WHO PLAN TO VOTE "YES"

Bean (IL)
Cuellar (TX)
Dicks (WA)
Jefferson (LA)
Moran (VA)
Tanner (TN)

DEMOCRATS WHO ARE UNDECIDED BUT LEANING "YES"

None

DEMOCRATS WHO ARE UNDECIDED BUT LEANING "NO"

Ackerman (NY)
Baca (CA)
Berman (CA)
Boren (OK)
Butterfield (NC)
Carson (IN)
Clyburn (SC)
Emanuel (IL)
Langevin (RI)
McCarthy (NY)
B. Miller (NC)
Payne (NJ)
Rothman (NJ)
Lorretta Sanchez (CA)
Watson (CA)
Watt (NC)

DEMOCRATS WHO SAY THEY ARE UNDECIDED AND NOT LEANING

Berkley (NV)
Sanford Bishop (GA)
T. Bishop (NY)
Clay (MO)
Cooper (TN)
Costa (CA)
D. Davis (IL)
J. Davis (FL)
L. Davis (TN)
S. Davis (CA)
Edwards (TX)
Ford (TN)
Gonzalez (TX)
Hinojosa (TX)
Israel (NY)
Kilpatrick (MI)
Jackson-Lee (TX)
Meeks (NY)
D. Moore (KS)
Ortiz (TX)
Snyder (AR)
Towns (NY)

DEMOCRATS WHO DECLINED TO ANSWER THE NATIONAL JOURNAL SURVEY

Chandler (KY)
DeGette (CO)
Eshoo (CA)
Frank (MA)
Kanjorski (PA)
Lofgren (CA)
Lowey (NY)
Matheson (UT)
Reyes (TX)
D. Scott (GA)
Sherman (CA)
Skelton (MO)
M. Thompson (CA)

DEMOCRATS WHO DID NOT RESPOND TO THE NATIONAL JOURNAL BY PRESS TIME

Andrews (NJ)
Boyd (FL)
Conyers (MI)
Cramer (AL)
Filner (CA)
Gordon (TN)
Larson (CT)
Lipinski (IL)
Millender-McDonald (CA)
Owens (NY)
Ruppersberger (MD)
Rush (IL)
Velazquez (NY)
Waters (CA)

www.ZaZona.com
Support this Newsletter and ZaZona.com by donating:
www.zazona.com/Donations.htm

To Subscribe, Unsubscribe or to view the Archive go to:
http://www.zazona.com/shameh1b/JobDestructionNews.htm

Back to archives