Posted on 07/27/2005 10:42:51 AM PDT by Happy2BMe
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - President Bush urged Republican hold outs on Wednesday to back a controversial free trade agreement with Central America, and party leaders predicted he would win but only after a tough fight for votes.
"The president reminded us that we come here not only to represent our district but to represent the nation," House of Representatives Majority Leader Tom DeLay told reporters after a Capitol Hill meeting between Bush and House Republicans, many of whom have opposed it on the grounds that it will hurt industries in their regions. "It will be a tough vote but we'll pass CAFTA tonight," the Texas Republican said. "We will honor our commitments to the south, we will protect our national security and will do it all with very few Democrats."
The long-awaited vote would end months of uncertainty about the fate of the U.S.-Central American Free Trade Agreement, or CAFTA, which lowers trade barriers between the United States, Costa Rica, El Salvador, Guatemala, Honduras, Nicaragua and the Dominican Republic.
The White House has a harder time rounding up votes for CAFTA than for any other recent trade pact because of stiff opposition from many Republicans in textile and sugar-producing states who fear it will cause job losses.
In addition, most Democrats oppose CAFTA on the grounds that its labor provisions are not tough enough for a region with a poor record on workers' rights. The White House says the labor provisions are stronger than any previous trade agreement and consistent with guidelines Congress set in 2002.
Bush appealed to House Republicans to put aside any "parochial interests" they might have about CAFTA and look at the broader benefits of the pact to the United States and the six other countries, DeLay said.
"It is good for our national security in supporting these fledging democracies at our back door. It is good in our effort against illegal immigration. It is good for our economy," DeLay said.
DeLay said Republicans would gavel the CAFTA vote to a close "when we get 218," the number of votes needed for approval. Republican leaders have angered Democrats in the past by holding votes open until they finally pressure enough party members to vote the way the leadership wants.
CHINA TRADE VOTE
Several Republicans from the textile states of South Carolina, Alabama and Georgia are expected to support CAFTA after reaching a deal with Republican leaders and U.S. Trade Representative Rob Portman to address specific concerns.
However, many Republicans from North Carolina -- which has experienced heavy textile job losses -- have remained opposed.
The Bush administration also has made promises aimed at reducing sugar industry opposition to the pact, but many Republicans from sugar-producing states such as Louisiana, Florida, Montana and Idaho continue to have concerns.
The vote on CAFTA will be proceeded by a vote on Republican bill aimed at addressing a number of trade issues with China. House leaders expect to pick up the support of some Republicans in industrial states like Pennsylvania with that bill.
Only six Democrats have publicly announced their support for CAFTA. Portman told Reuters he remained hopeful that many more would vote for it in the end, but declined to give any estimate.
Portman said he had just come from a meeting with three undecided Democrats and they had refused to tell him on they planned to vote on CAFTA.
Since NAFTA the US Economy has added 18 million jobs and our unemployment rate remains low.
Same thing with CAFTA. Stop listening to your union buddies. At least question their socialist protectionist mentality.
You stand with the Democratic Underground that's where you stand.
A little competition never hurt anyone.
"added 18 million jobs..."
Breakdown and stats big boy.
Service, manufacturing, banking, finance industry, construction? What....
INCREASED EXPORTS AND INVESTMENT FLOWS
INCREASED TOTAL TRADE AND BROADER ECONOMIC TRENDS
BENEFITS FOR ALL NAFTA PARTNERS
PROGRESS FOR ENVIRONMENT AND LABOR
The US cannot afford to stick its head in the sand.
I love it. Neo-Cons Vs. Paleo-Cons.
"Since NAFTA the US Economy has added 18 million jobs and our unemployment rate remains low."
=====================================
Given your seemingly indepth knowledge on the subject, can you go into any further details on the benefits NAFTA has had on the United States economy and job market please?
You forgot massive increases in illegal immigration. Wasn't NAFTA supposed build the Mexican economy?
Or how about the influx of South American gangs such as MS-13 that have ties with terrorists?
Yeah, that's success we should really want to emulate.
Once again this proves the point that we did better opposing the rats than we do with our party laying on their backs for a liberal republican president.
Give me a conservative or give me freakin' @ss-rats.
What do these people know about NAFTA that the congressmen and senators I have been discussing this issue with this afternoon don't?
Read it yourself. I cannot imagine why there is anyone who would dispute the success of NAFTA ...except maybe some protectionist left wingers who ear competition in the marketplace.
https://www.cato.org/dailys/12-23-02-2.html
My webserver is down today, but when I get home I'll fire it back up and start a (moderated) "CAFTA HALL OF SHAME" thread on it that yall (me too!) can use.
You view Cato as an unbiased source in this issue?
I want to expand rights and prosperity...that is what the free market is about.
Building economic walls is self defeating and unAmerican.
I should have been more precise. I meant that I believe we can find more Ron Paul's out there and that we need to find them and then elect them. You are correct, there aren't enough of these folks out there, but I believe they can be found. In fact they must be found, if we are to turn this ship around. It has taken a very long time for this country to reach this state of affairs and in turn I believe it will take a very long time to correct it.
"I'm with you in the hopes we have more reps out there that'll stand up but I won't hold my breath."
Neither am I. But I have to keep the faith... for my children's future if nothing else.
"As far as the lobbying goes I believe it's not us small business guys who will ever have much clout with the reps.....these big corps. and foreign gov't.s are hiring former DC insiders left and right togain access that we'll never see in our lifetime........that's why the lobbying has got to be cut dramtically."
OK... But how do we "cut" lobbying without cutting funding from people like me should my company grow large enough to actually help make a difference? Who and how are we then getting our information from on these candidates? That leaves the media and public broadcasting... And who controls that? The very "insiders" that you just mentioned. So... have we now "cut" the "insiders" influence... or have we actually helped to eliminated all other "outside" influences?
This is still the best country on the planet, but I truly believe we are going down hill and unfortunately things might not change until we hit bottom, and I don't even want to think about that!
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.