Free Republic
Browse · Search
Smoky Backroom
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

In Bush Win, House Narrowly Approves CAFTA
Associated Press ^ | July 27, 2005 | JIM ABRAMS

Posted on 07/27/2005 9:14:44 PM PDT by RWR8189

WASHINGTON - The House narrowly approved the Central American Free Trade Agreement early Thursday, a personal triumph for President Bush, who campaigned aggressively for the accord he said would foster prosperity and democracy in the hemisphere.

The 217-215 vote just after midnight adds six Latin American countries to the growing lists of nations with free trade agreements with the United States and averts what could have been a major political embarrassment for the Bush administration.

It was an uphill effort to win a majority, with Bush traveling to Capitol Hill earlier in the day to appeal to wavering Republicans to support a deal he said was critical to U.S. national security.

Lobbying continued right up to the vote, with Vice President Dick Cheney, U.S. Trade Representative Rob Portman (news, bio, voting record) and Commerce Secretary Carlos Gutierrez tracking undecided lawmakers.

The United States signed the accord, known as CAFTA, a year ago with Costa Rica, El Salvador, Guatemala, Honduras, Nicaragua and the Dominican Republic, and the Senate approved it last month. It now goes to the president for his signature.

To capture a majority, supporters had to overcome what some have called free trade fatigue, a growing sentiment that free trade deals such as the North American Free Trade Agreement with Mexico and Canada have contributed to a loss of well-paying American jobs and the soaring trade deficit.

Democrats, who were overwhelmingly against CAFTA, also argued that its labor rights provisions were weak and would result in exploitation of workers in Central America.

But supporters pointed out that CAFTA would over time eliminate tariffs and other trade barriers that impede U.S. sales to the region, correcting the current situation in which 80 percent of Central American goods enter the United States duty-free but Americans must pay heavy tariffs.

The agreement would also strengthen intellectual property protections and make it easier for Americans to invest in the region.

"This is a test of American leadership in a changing world," said Rep. Kevin Brady (news, bio, voting record), R-Texas, a leading proponent of the agreement. "We cannot claim to be fighting for American jobs and yet turn our backs on 44 million new customers in Central America.


TOPICS:
KEYWORDS: cafta; gatt; nafta
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 501-520521-540541-560 ... 821-836 next last
To: motzman

LOL

It's been a very slow and boring week at work.


521 posted on 07/28/2005 2:46:39 PM PDT by Mase
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 516 | View Replies]

To: GhostofWCooper
It's always fun to meet a fellow who's proud of his own shortcomings.
522 posted on 07/28/2005 2:48:08 PM PDT by ohioWfan ("If My people, which are called by My name, will humble themselves and pray.....")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 520 | View Replies]

To: ThermoNuclearWarrior
People like you,who don't know anything about how the government works, the enumerated powers of each branch and specifically those of a president, but are demanding that he act like a benevolent dictator, and fulfill YOUR desires, immediately, really need to get a grip.

WHERE WERE YOU, 10,20,30,40,50 YEARS AGO, WHEN THE SAME PROBLEMS EXISTED?

I am NOT an "open border idiot" and if anyone here is an idiot, it is you.

I believe in the rule of law and am against the breaking of any law.

But the only way you and your ilk seem to be able to try to make a point, is by calling other people names and claiming that they are something they are not. If others aren't foaming at the mouth and screaming your one note, then, or course, they must, must, must be for open borders, right? WRONG!

523 posted on 07/28/2005 2:48:14 PM PDT by nopardons
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 275 | View Replies]

To: jeremiah
You're playing word games and being childish.

There isn't going to be high unemployment due to CAFTA and if Hillary is elected president, it will be because people such as YOU help her win, by either not voting or voting third party.

A DEPRESSION is an economic term. What you just described is something something else. And I doubt that you were clinically depressed during the Clinton presidency, because you love being miserable and want everyone else to be as well.

524 posted on 07/28/2005 2:56:30 PM PDT by nopardons
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 338 | View Replies]

To: taxed2death
Yes, it IS rather "easy" to state that which is TOTALLY INCORRECT! Executive Powers can NOT be used to do what you want done.

You don't want a president, you want a benevolent DICTATOR; one who fulfills your every whim and desire.

525 posted on 07/28/2005 2:59:17 PM PDT by nopardons
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 343 | View Replies]

To: Certain_Doom
She works full time, and they do have an insurance plan, but it isn't great. But, here is the key - no one is forcing her to work at Wal-Mart. If she doesn't like it she can working elsewhere.

I worked for Wal-Mart. I got sick 4 months after I went to work. I was in hospital for 9 days. Walmart paid for it.

Then, my husband died. Wal-Mart Insurance paid me $25,000.

I love Wal-Mart.

526 posted on 07/28/2005 3:07:21 PM PDT by carenot (Proud member of The Flying Skillet Brigade)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 443 | View Replies]

To: eddie willers

He probably means paleoconservatives.


527 posted on 07/28/2005 3:13:15 PM PDT by Jason_b
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: Nachum
Why are you so enamored of paying sugar subsidies to already very wealthy people? That's what America has been doing for man decades, to our American sugar business owners.
528 posted on 07/28/2005 3:15:03 PM PDT by nopardons
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 444 | View Replies]

To: KentTrappedInLiberalSeattle

Aaaaaaaaawwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww, don't confuse them with the FACTS! Don't you know, that they don't ever care about about facts? :-)


529 posted on 07/28/2005 3:18:52 PM PDT by nopardons
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 469 | View Replies]

To: snowrip
I am offically a Libertarian.

So you now believe in legalizing drugs and destroying our culture from within?

530 posted on 07/28/2005 3:24:18 PM PDT by patriciaruth (They are all Mike Spanns)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 470 | View Replies]

To: carenot
No, I don't bend the knee to any politician, now am I a drooling sycophant of anyone, proclaiming him or her akin to THE SECOND COMING, who can do nothing wrong; unlike you. :-)
531 posted on 07/28/2005 3:25:26 PM PDT by nopardons
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 494 | View Replies]

To: nopardons
Why are you so enamored of paying sugar subsidies to already very wealthy people? That's what America has been doing for man decades, to our American sugar business owners.

Who do you think is pocketing the money that is saved when a factory moves accross the border? Who pockets the money when a job is outsourced? How did Mexico lose a million jobs over the last 10 years? Did anyone make a profit from it? Who's military is financed when we buy cheap imported products?

It is indeed a puzzle.

532 posted on 07/28/2005 3:31:12 PM PDT by Nachum
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 528 | View Replies]

To: KentTrappedInLiberalSeattle

Your post 513-- thanks. I didn't know that.


533 posted on 07/28/2005 3:32:48 PM PDT by expat_panama
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 513 | View Replies]

To: GhostofWCooper
BTW, you read into the statement any profanity. I used a dash. So there.

Using a dash doesn't fool anyone. Knock it off.

534 posted on 07/28/2005 3:40:39 PM PDT by Sidebar Moderator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 515 | View Replies]

To: All

I am all for CAFTA-DR, Just as long as the countries included in CAFTA-DR do not bring their trash up to the U.S.A


535 posted on 07/28/2005 3:49:55 PM PDT by CollegeRepublicanNU (Currently Attending The Rush Limbaugh Institute for Advanced Conservative Studies)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 534 | View Replies]

To: KentTrappedInLiberalSeattle
WITH are you talking about? I Googled "Marx" and "free trade" and came up with his speech, which I copied/pasted into a posting. What does Buchanan have to do with it? As I was reading it, I thought I remembered coming across the fact that Marx was a proponent of Free Trade, which led me to the Google.

So you're saying Marx didn't support Free Trade?

Wait to find out all the facts before saying that I'm dishonest. I would hope that you'd have the decency to apologize for impugning my character.

536 posted on 07/28/2005 3:50:43 PM PDT by Proud2BAmerican
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 279 | View Replies]

To: Stellar Dendrite

Ding ding ding! :-)


537 posted on 07/28/2005 3:51:11 PM PDT by Proud2BAmerican
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 339 | View Replies]

To: Nachum
There are sugar factories already extant in other places. The rest of the world pays far less for sugar and products which contain sugar, than we do. Ergo, your stab at refutation is inane.

So I'll ask you again, WHY ARE YOU SO ENAMORED WITH SUGAR SUBSIDIES, WHICH KEEP OUR PRICES HIGH AND DO NOT GO TO THE EMPLOYEES OF OUR SUGAR COMPANIES?

Are you also in favor of farm subsidies, which go to the likes of Sam Donaldson, who isn't really a farmer?

It's only a "puzzle" to you, because you don't understand the topic at all.

538 posted on 07/28/2005 3:54:20 PM PDT by nopardons
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 532 | View Replies]

To: KentTrappedInLiberalSeattle
FYI: I typed in "Karl Marx" and "Free Trade" in Google -- these are the 2 links that I referenced when putting in the quote you responded to. Can you tell me if these are fraudulent quotes, or am I misunderstanding you when you say it's a "long-discredited source" -- which source is discredited?

www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1848/free-trade/

and

www.cooperativeindividualism.org/marx_freetrade.html

539 posted on 07/28/2005 3:58:53 PM PDT by Proud2BAmerican
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 279 | View Replies]

To: Proud2BAmerican
WITH are you talking about?

Not an intelligible query. Try again.

What does Buchanan have to do with it?

Follow the link provided for you (go back and re-read #279; carefully, this time). It should take you less time to read than it took me to provide. You're welcome, incidentally.

You placed your smarmy little attempt at guilt-by-association in direct response to my previous post, filled with nothing but Reagan quotes. If this is your attempt at aping the wide-eyed ingenue: it's a spectacularly inept one. If you placed it there without meaning it as commentary, on the other hand: then you're simply addled. Neither one of these is my problem, nor merit any "apology" (hah!) from me.

Wait for a bus, while you're at it; it'll get there first, I assure you.

540 posted on 07/28/2005 4:02:26 PM PDT by KentTrappedInLiberalSeattle ("As a conservative site, Free Republic is pro-G-d, PRO-LIFE..." -- FR founder Jim Robinson)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 536 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 501-520521-540541-560 ... 821-836 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Smoky Backroom
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson