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."
I just thought that, this time anyway, I'd calculate it in a way that YOU would understand.
LOL!
>>>What is "CAFTA"? What do you think? Good/not well?thank you
Since NAFTA passed in 1994 the employment level in the US has increased from 124.6 million (Jan 1995) to 141.6 million (Jun 2005), real GDP has increased 38% (2004 annual vs. 1994 annual) , and the average annual unemployment rate has been below that of 1994 every year since then. I'd say it has been a success.
Textile and furniture and IT, all outsourcable, all key industries in NC.
"We have destroyed our industrial base, and are in a much weaker position because of it."
The only rational explanation for this, other than short-term profit, is that somebody - an assortment of internationalist busybodies actually - fervently believes that war will not be possible in the future, due to all the interdependencies. I myself believe that to be a very dangerous assumption.
I'd still like to see someone explain exactly how reducing or removing tariffs on U.S. exports promotes off-shoring.
Yes copied, because it's hard to articulate in ones own words what is BS.
Tariff removal is a smokescreen.
CAFTA is actually about obtaining secure property rights in Latin American countries for transnational companies wanting to relocate there. And yes, until their supplier base relocates there as well, they'll be able to import spare-parts and such duty free.
It's the ripple effect. Much of NC's textile industry has already been decimated. But now Dubya has to eradicate the rest of the supply chain.
Sorry about your friends and family.
I've got to be honest here. I've got a lot of friends and family who buy sugar and cloth and prefer not having to make donations to support your friends and family every time they go shopping.
America's industrial base is fine (click here); we'll just never hear this from those who aren't doing well and think their pain has to be someone else's fault
Nice try. Unfortunately, this is not a one-sided deal. Contrary to what the globalists would have you believe, there are import tariffs on these goods. CAFTA removes the import tarifs as well as the export tariffs. The removal of these tariffs makes offshoring economically viable for corporations.
If you think about this logically, you will see through the globalists' lies. If it was the case that we impose no tariffs on these goods and Central America does, what motivation do they have for entering the treaty? We heard the same BS when NAFTA rolled in. 500,000 lost textile jobs later, I guess they think we're kind of stupid and we'll go for the same lies once again.
Thank you"NC28203"translation
"However sometimes data can be tricky; I would like to ask all of you are U.S.A. better off now then it was before NAFTA or new agreement CAFTA? I have feeling this is counter movement against EU though each of them are same. Politicians are playing head game with you; don't sell your country; stand for it what is worth it. U.S.A. is size of Europe you have resources you can do it; don't put your self in this."
Correction noted. But the idea of CAFTA counties under selling us with our own good is my point.
NAFT has it's good and bad points ~ I'm a free-trader so I'm more pro-NAFT than con. ;)
I voted for Perot in '92 and I'm still waiting for that "giant sucking sound." :):)
Hey Steve, you like these taxes and I don't. It would be nice if we could just work this out in a way where you could pay all the taxes you want and you could just leave me out of it --but that's not what you want. You want me to pay these taxes. What's happening is you want my money and you want the Feds to spend my money as you see fit.
You could at least say "please".
Maybe Steve could send a check to the government for each product he buys from abroad. With the percentage of tarriff he thinks should be on that type of product?
" voted for Perot in '92"Who is this person"voted for Perot in '92"thank you"blackie"
What would be great would be if all these import tax and spend people would just check to see if there's any foreign made chips in their PC, and then stay off the FR until they they find a 100% Made in USA computer.
Perot was a third party candidate that did well enough to split the vote and get Clinton elected.
I must be having a senor moment ~ I can't even remember the party's name. :)
I've voted a straight pubbie ticket since '92, even though I'm a registered Independent.
I voted for Dole.
The giant sucking sound came from the oval office while Clintoon was in office. ;)
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.
