Posted on 07/15/2005 8:36:53 AM PDT by 1rudeboy
President Bush's tour of a North Carolina textile mill takes him to the kind of business that critics say would be damaged by his free trade pact with Central America.
Ahead of that visit Friday, Bush was to meet at the White House with President Antonio Saca of El Salvador, one of the countries that is a party to the trade agreement.
The Central American Free Trade Agreement passed the Senate on a 54-45 vote two weeks ago. It could come up as early as next week in the House, where its fate is less certain. It faces near-solid Democratic opposition and only lukewarm GOP support.
Bush was scheduled to tour the Helms plant of R.L. Stowe Mills in Belmont, in the Piedmont region of central North Carolina, and then give a speech at nearby Gaston College. Both are in the district of Rep. Sue Myrick, R-N.C., the only one of North Carolina's 13-member House delegation to publicly endorse the measure.
The trade agreement, signed by the United States a year ago, would end or sharply lower trade barriers with the five Central American countries of Costa Rica, El Salvador, Guatemala, Honduras and Nicaragua. It would also apply to the Dominican Republic, a Caribbean nation.
The measure "is important to supporting emerging democracies in Central America," said White House spokesman Scott McClellan.
It would also help stabilize trade between the United States and the region, McClellan said. "Right now, when 80 percent of the imports from Central America come in here duty-free, that creates an unlevel playing field. We want to make sure the markets are open and that there's a level playing field."
North Carolina is one of the hotbeds of opposition to the pact, which is modeled on the North American Free Trade Agreement passed 12 years ago that established free trade among the United States, Canada and Mexico.
Critics contend CAFTA will cost U.S. jobs by making it easier for U.S. companies to relocate operations in Central America, where labor costs are lower. The White House argues the opposite, asserting it will bring jobs to the United States.
Bush contends the pact would be "good for American workers, good for our farmers and good for small businesses" and "help increase sales abroad and job creation at home."
The textile industry is divided on CAFTA.
Some are opposed because of an inherent mistrust of any free trade deal. Others say it will help the U.S. industry because it will help Central American manufacturers, who buy material and yarn from the United States. Chinese textiles, by contrast, have little or no U.S. content.
CAFTA would further open a market of 44 million people by eliminating trade barriers to U.S. manufactured and farm goods, protecting trademarks and other intellectual property and establishing legal frameworks for U.S. investment. Last year the region purchased about $15 billion worth of U.S. goods.
Many Democrats argue that inadequate worker rights provisions in the agreement will lead to labor abuses. It is also opposed by lawmakers from sugar beet and sugar cane-growing areas, and others who link free trade to America's soaring trade deficits.
House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., said the fact that GOP House leaders haven't yet brought the bill up could be a sign that it lacks the votes.
"I can't really speak with authority on the number of Republican votes that are 'no' on CAFTA, but I hear that it is a significant number," she told reporters. "I know that there are only a small number of Democrats who would be supporting it, so I think they are in trouble on CAFTA."
"Once again, the textile company that Bush visits today does not manufacture a "raw material," despite that you wish it to be so."
You clearly have me confused with someone else on this thread. I've not referenced any specific textile manufacturing company here.
And finally, Yes (because I get to keep more of my money).
Would you be willing to say what you like? Fer instance, I'm willing to say I like low prices, low taxes, and having Big Cloth and Big Sugar pay their own way like I have to.
You mentioned "colonialism" and "natural resources," while referring to a reply that mentioned "raw materials." I simply pointed out that your assertion is false.
Snideness is my day job.
"Big Cloth"
Ha ha ha. Good one. Cede all trade authority to supranational, unelected bodies. That'll fix "Big Cloth," "Big Sugar," "Big Tobacco," "Big Furniture" and whatever other domestic agricultural or manufacturing industries that have been successful enough to earn the sobriquet "Big," as well as your peculiarly internationalist ire.
"Snideness is my day job."
Obviously. But, does it pay well?
"I simply pointed out that your assertion is false."
You created a straw man. You pointed out nothing attributable to my "opinions," as you put it.
Yep. I'm still trying to figure out which political genius told Bush it would be a good idea to go to a North Carolina textile mill to sell his plan to ship still more North Carolina textile jobs to Latin America.
Hello? Is this thing turned on?
"Reverse colonialism. Plunder natural resources, no value added . . . ,"
implies that this trade agreement will result in raw materials being shipped-out, value-added, and shipped back in. I merely reminded you that it is not happening in this case. Hardly a strawman.
I would trade with them rather than with China that is alraedy threatening us with a nuke bomb.
Maybe that textile mill sells a lot of its product in Central America? Just a thought.
"implies that this trade agreement will result in raw materials being shipped-out, value-added, and shipped back in. I merely reminded you that it is not happening in this case. Hardly a strawman."
You need to step outside of your own head for a second, and realize that that reply was not to you, and in no way referenced CAFTA. Ergo, you created a straw man argument.
But on the bright side, Gaston County will be getting a Dole fruit processing plant that's supposed to create 3000 jobs. Of course using our legislature is using tax payer dollars to incent them to come here.
I'm thinking the same thing. Like NAFTA wasn't bad enough.
No doubt. I don't know how much more rising incomes and falling unemployment I can stand.
I'm sure there must be a few that have survived because they employ illegal immigrants.
It's certainly the only way Dubya will get a warm welcome.
Another one of his 'conservative' advisors. Gaston County used to be considered one of THE textile centers not only in the US but in the world. I grew up there and I couldn't tell you more than a handful of mills that are still open and operating. And he's going to Belmont/Mt. Holly, the core of the textile area.
So maybe CAFTA-DR will cause all those illegal immigrants to lose their jobs? Isn't that a good thing?
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.