It also opens industries in those countries to competition from US companies, including such government monopolies as telecommunications and insurance.
The price for this would be some marginally reduced cost for sugar for American consumers.
The people who oppose this agreement drive me nuts.
How many times does former USTR Robert Zoellick have to say that CAFTA isn't about trade, its about "alleviating poverty" and "giving hope" to central America before you get it?
How many times does Rob Portman have to say " I call it CAFTA-DR or DR-CAFTA so it doesn't rhyme with NAFTA" before you begin to understand this agreement isn't about trade?
How many times must the "free traders" be shown that CAFTA is about the "trade capacity building" giveaway of US taxpayer money, the illegal use of US domestic agencies to build foreign countries into competitors for US business on the taxpayer dime, where in their natural state they could not compete without the help of our disloyal federal government?
How many times must it be shown that the CAFTA and other "free trade" agreements bypass constitutional government by setting up an unconstitutional "trade minister" to negotiate deals in place of Congress, to cede sovereignty to the WTO to make decisions that the elected representatives of our government should be wholly responsible for, and that CAFTA sets up unelected "working groups" to implement the agreements in any way they see fit without any review or debate by the American people who just get stuck paying for it all? How many times?
Have you read one page of the agreement?
From #36
You seem to have on helluva lot of faith in the Secretary-General of the UN. I'm glad you do even after to Food for Oil fiasco because I don't. He has shown me that he is
susceptible to the common greed for money. His objectivity, reliability, and sound judgment are in serious question, IMO.
"Article 10.19: Selection of Arbitrators
"(the) tribunal shall comprise three arbitrators, one arbitrator appointed by each of the disputing parties and the third, who shall be the presiding arbitrator, appointed by agreement of the disputing parties.
2. The Secretary-General shall serve as appointing authority for an arbitration under this Section."
Did I say it was about tarrifs? It's about tariff elimination in most cases. The MFN does jump up in some odd places though.
8-4 DRAFT
Subject to Legal Review for Accuracy, Clarity, and Consistency
January 28, 2004
transition period means the ten-year period beginning on the date of entry into force of this Agreement, except that for any good for which the Schedule to Annex 3.3 (Tariff Elimination) of the Party applying the measure provides for the Party to eliminate its tariffs on the good over a
period of more than ten years, transition period shall mean the tariff elimination period for the good.