SUNDAY, AUGUST 28, 2005
DR-CAFTA Approved in US: How Could It Happen? And What Can We Do Now?
By Kathy Hoyt, National Co-Coordinator, Nicaragua Network[8/29/05]
Maybe I should stop waking up to the clock radio news and try music instead. The blow at 6:00am on Thursday July 28, 2005, could only be compared to that morning in February 1990 when I was awakened by news of the Sandinista electoral loss. The House of Representatives had passed CAFTA in the middle of the night! I screamed, "That's impossible! The President didn't have the votes!" What can we tell our friends in Central America now? We worked hard; we did all we could, but we lost. Now the subsidized agribusiness corn and rice will come flowing in and price Central American farmers out of the market and off of their land! It was too much to bear.
The radio said the vote count was 217 to 215. The Washington Post at our door said that after the normal 15 minute voting period, the vote was 180 against with 175 in favor of the legislation. We would have won! But, over the protests of the Democrats that they were violating the rules, the Republican leadership extended the voting period until 12:03am and rounded up legislators and twisted arms to emerge with the victory. It turns out that, in reality, the vote was even closer. Representative Charles Taylor (R-NC) was recorded as "not voting." But he said on Thursday that a voting machine malfunction prevented him from casting his vote against CAFTA. He has asked the Clerk of the House to correct the record to reflect his "no" vote. This would make the final tally 217-216. The Bush administration brought out all its big guns before the vote. The President and Vice-President visited the House on Wednesday afternoon. The Vice-President returned in the evening, staying until 10:00pm . Lawmakers told the Washington Post that GOP leaders told their rank and file that, if they wanted anything, now was the time to ask. Evidently, according to the Post, many of the favors handed out in exchange for votes will be included in the energy and highway bills that Congress is passing this week. Some votes were swayed by the passage on Wednesday of a bill that would give U.S. firms expanded means to seek duties on imports from China . The bill was promised to several representatives from industrial states in exchange for their "yes" votes on CAFTA. Other representatives were promised restoration of money that the White House has tried to cut from agriculture programs.
Not all representatives succumbed to pressure and promises. Rep. Sanford Bishop ( D- GA ) received offers of assistance to peanut growers in his state but voted against the agreement. Bob Ney (R-OH) said that he was courted by everybody "from the President's dog on up to the President himself." But he said that he couldn't justify voting "yes" on CAFTA based only on the promise of passage of the China trade bill which, he noted, has not passed the Senate yet and was far from a sure thing. Rep. Howard Coble (R-NC), whose mother worked in the mills, said, "When female textile workers plead with me to vote against CAFTA, I said to the president, that's my mama talking to me, and I can't turn a deaf ear to their pleas." He was one of 28 Republicans who voted against the bill.
The Democratic leadership did not choose to formally "whip" the CAFTA legislation; that is, they did not require Democrats to vote against the bill. They argued that to "whip" the bill would have been counterproductive because it would have made it harder for Republicans to oppose CAFTA. In the end, however, Republican leaders won the support of about half of the Republican representatives from textile-producing states like Alabama, Georgia, and North and South Carolina with claims that the Central American countries had agreed to certain concessions apart from CAFTA such as the promise to use American-made pockets and linings in pants exported to the U.S. But at the same time, a recent report by Public Citizen has shown that 89% of the deals negotiated to gain passage of previous trade agreements have been broken.
After the House passed the DR-CAFTA legislation just after midnight on Thursday morning, the Senate voted later in the day to pass the bill AGAIN. It turns out that the vote last month was only a tactic to help pave the road for House passage. The Constitution mandates that all legislation with revenue provisions must originate in the House and be passed by the Senate after passage by the House.
When the impact of DR-CAFTA on Central America and the Dominican Republic was infrequently mentioned, it was to refer to the need for U.S. trade to support "fledgling democracies" to keep them from falling into the clutches of Hugo Chavez of Venezuela and Fidel Castro of Cuba . President Bush noted that four ( Nicaragua , El Salvador , Honduras and the Dominican Republic ) of the six countries who signed the DR-CAFTA had assisted the U.S. military effort in Iraq and that this assistance should be recognized by passage of the agreement.
Daniel Ortega's name also appeared in the Congressional debate as noted by Sarah Anderson in a piece she wrote for Common Dreams. On the Senate side, James Inhofe (R-OK) said, "These Communists, these enemies of the United States , Chavez, Ortega, and Castro, are all in opposition to CAFTA. If you want to be on their side, you would vote against CAFTA." Even before House debate began, Rep. David Dreier (R-CA) wrote the Washington Post, "Those of us who well remember Nicaragua 's Daniel Ortega do not take lightly his fierce campaign to defeat this agreement. We can abandon our friends to poverty, dictatorship and the Ortega vision for the future. Or we can help them to grow, prosper and improve their standard of living." In even more outrageous hyperbole, Rep. Mike Kirk (R-IL) said on the House floor that, "We can either send exports to Central America or troops." However, Rep. Bill Pascrell, Jr. (D-NJ) had a superb retort: "I have never heard anything more absurd or simplistic in my nine years here in the House of Representatives. The people of these six countries oppose CAFTA. They say it is unfair. And it really is a corporate-inspired trade deal that hurts working people both in the United States and Central America ."
In the immediate aftermath of the vote, the Institute for Agriculture and Trade Policy released a statement saying that the passage of CAFTA "signals a major setback for U.S. sugar farmers and a damaging blow to Central American farmers," adding that the deal "would lead to the destruction of the U.S. sugar program and increase dumping of agricultural commodities below their cost of production into Central American countries." The National Family Farm Coalition noted that champagne corks were popped in the executive suites of ADM, Cargill and Con Agra, the big winners with the passage of CAFTA, adding that "the vast majority of citizens in the U.S. , the Dominican Republic , and Central American countries are the losers."
Others lamented the 275,000 HIV positive Central Americans who will be cut off from life-saving generic medicines because of the extended patent monopolies included in the treaty and factory workers who will suffer with fewer protections than they enjoyed under the Caribbean Basin Initiative which will now be replaced by CAFTA.
At the same time, we must evaluate the work that the various coalitions carried out in opposition to CAFTA and take into account the fact that we came closer to defeating a trade agreement than has ever been done before. We were able to get the word out that the majority of Central Americans opposed the agreement just as the majority of people in the United States have now turned against so-called "free trade." While the sugar and textile industry representatives received the most press here in the U.S. for their opposition to the agreement, the Stop CAFTA Coalition, composed of many solidarity groups, was a leader in the struggle against CAFTA. Some organizations in the coalition sponsored visitors from Central America , including farmers, factory union organizers, and even bishops, to tell the story of the real impact CAFTA would have on their economies and lives. Some put out news bulletins for members of Congress. The coalition helped organize demonstrations at every single city in the U.S. where negotiating sessions were held. We supported the activities of our partners in Central America with the placing of supportive paid ads in their local newspapers and other activities at the times when negotiating sessions were held in their countries. We stayed in touch with our Central American partners and publicized the demonstrations carried out by popular movements there. The Nicaragua Network , an active member of the coalition, sent to every member of the House of Representatives a petition to the U.S. Congress signed by over 800 representatives of Central American organizations meeting at the Meso-American Forum in El Salvador explaining why they opposed CAFTA. Representative Hilda Solis (D-CA), the only member of Congress of Nicaraguan parentage, then sent it again with a letter from her reminding her colleagues that they had received the petition from the Nicaragua Network and explaining why she would vote against CAFTA.
But, we still lost. What can we do now? We can keep close watch on the implementation of CAFTA and report on abuses. In fact, the Stop CAFTA Coalition has resolved to stay in existence to do just that. Visit www.stopcafta.org. We can continue to oppose the Free Trade Area of the Americas (FTAA) and make sure that it remains, as it is today, "dead in the water." We can work to oppose the FTAA's baby sister the AFTA, or Andean Free Trade Agreement, which is encountering numerous problems. Labor unions are vowing to punish the 15 Democrats who voted for CAFTA by making sure that they are challenged by strong candidates in their next primary elections. Below is a list of the Democrats who voted in favor of DR-CAFTA. Is your representative on the list? Be sure to let him or her know how disappointed you are. On the other hand, if your representative voted against CAFTA, don't fail to call or write and thank him or her.
Democrats who voted for DR-CAFTA:
Bean (IL), Cooper (TN), Cuellar (TX), Dicks (WA), Hinojosa (TX), Jefferson (LA), Matheson (UT), Meeks (NY), Moore (KS), Moran (VA), Ortiz, (TX), Skelton (MO), Snyder (AK), Tanner (TN), Towns (NY).
So let's wipe our tears and prepare for the next battle.
Labels: Archives