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.
Good night, all! Hubby's turn on the internet.
No, actually you and he won't. But if I'm wrong, your numbers grow, and Hillary, or whoever the Dem candidate is, wins, be prepared to get unmercifully trashed here on FR.
And now, I really DO have to ho to bed.
Good night...........
I watched the debate on C-Span.org, when the Republicans brought up Castro, Chavez and the Sandinistas as reasons to support CAFTA, Rangel jumped to their defense.
Yes, their main complaint was that it didn't force even more labor standards on the other nations..
But one Dem reason for voting no took the cake. She said the agreement would lift tarriffs on American made tobacco, to the region. Which would make cigarettes cheaper there and hurt the health of the people living in that reason.
National socialist nanny statists are bad enough!.. But an international nanny statist(at the expense of American business of course)!
As to the housing, a lot of households now work 2 and 1/2 jobs and when they buy a house they extend themselves as much as possible (namely zero down, interest only loans). There are very few one income families any longer. In our area, quite a few people in their fifties, with a nest egg, have bought large houses as an investment - they don't even have furniture or drapes for all the rooms. And houses are constantly being "flipped".
As to small entrepreneurs, people who sell Hallmark Cards to one another or plan birthday parties can't build cars, submarines, roads, aircraft carriers, rifles. Would you want a Chinese company to design and build our aircraft carriers or be subcontractors to supply 90% of the parts?
If you have worked in engineering, you know that to become a competent engineer who can see a project through to the end you have to have an education, be mentored in the lore of the specific field, and be baby sat on a few projects.
You can't just restart an industry from scratch immediately; you can't just tell someone to read a book on digital design, and design me a chip ASAP. This might work in the mind of Walter Williams but it doesn't in the real world.
"There is evidence that people are moving down in wages. The guy that used to be an engineer and is now driving a federal express truck is making less money. But he is employed."
Do you have statistics for that, or is it your WAG? I'm an engineer. I know many engineers, none of which are driving a fed ex truck, and all employeed in their field or a job that interests them. And if they are for some reason unemployeed, they are able to obtain a similar job. There are plenty of jobs out there for them. A rookie out of college shouldn't expect a 80 or 100k year job. It takes time to acheive that level of success. As with all professions, you have to earn your pay over time. Some employeer is not going to say, oh, goody, you're finally here to save the day. I'll give you an 80k salary, 4 weeks vacation and all 401k bennies starting yesterday. Unless you want us to become Europe and not have to earn our success, but, Americans work for their success and are proud of their achievements.
Will you crybabies shut up if we create 10 million jobs
PRESIDENT BUSH, to you, does NOT have the powers you imagine him to have. So I suggest that YOU stop making a complete idiot of yourself, with each post. Take a deep breath and step away from the keyboard and go read the Constitution; yes, all of it.
And since you are just a Johnny one note, I also suggest that you either realize that there are a whole lot of other problems to worry about on top of all of those Mexican and Guatemalan, etc. people coming here illegally. But if your heart is REALLY set on ONLY that, then get off your rear, go down to the border and offer your services to whomever you choose; be it the Minutemen or the Border Patrol.
Caviling about it here, does less than NOTHING!
Anybody who doesn't understand that needs to learn about the inroads China is making in the countries below our border.
The MSM did a great job reporting about Rove these last 3 weeks they forgot to report CAFTA to the American public.
Or was that the plan...
Heritage Foundation Research
Trade and Foreign Aid
CAFTA's Covert Opponent: China
Snip:
But if CAFTA fails, U.S. cotton exports to Central America will come to an end, while U.S. imports of Chinese textiles—with little or no U.S. content—soar.
Snip:
Chinese diplomatic advances in the Caribbean rim include massive trade agreements and military cooperation with Venezuela. (As one retired Venezuelan admiral recently put it, “You have to see this from a geopolitical point of view. We’re no longer a country allied to the Western Hemisphere. We’re going to be allied to China or Russia.”)
Snip:
It is perhaps a minor footnote in the congressional debate over CAFTA that all the countries involved maintain diplomatic ties with Taiwan and not with China.
Snip:
CAFTA’s defeat, therefore, would be a double victory for China.
Well, Well, Well, CAFTA is a very layered political strategy. From cotton exports to Taiwan policy.
Now if Nike would produce some of it's products in Central America instead of 100% in China to import into America I'll know CAFTA works.
And finally, Communist China is slowly becoming a pain in the global #$%.
According to this, the decline turned around in the 1990's.
http://www.leftbusinessobserver.com/Stats_earns.html
-- AND -- :
-- AND -- :
-- AND -- :
... and... and... and; etcetera, etcetera, etcetera. Ronald Wilson Reagan's tireless (and historically validated) championing of free trade, as a bedrock conservative principle, is easily enough demonstrated, beyond any possible hope of logical refutation. Even if they are wholly unfamiliar with the particulars -- and I am not -- five minutes with Google is all any naysayers ought to need, in order to educate themselves properly on the subject.
Historical revisionism is a mug's game, ultimately.
"But, generally speaking, the Protective system in these days is conservative, while the Free Trade system works destructively. It breaks up old nationalities and carries antagonism of proletariat and bourgeoisie to the uttermost point. In a word, the Free Trade system hastens the Social Revolution. In this revolutionary sense alone, gentlemen, I am in favor of Free Trade."
In other words: a long-discredited source quoting another long-discredited source.
Interesting approach, attempting to "link" the positions of Ronald Wilson Reagan with those of Karl Marx.
Not even remotely honest, mind... but: interesting, all the same.
The spirit of this agreement...the 'free flow of labor'...makes a mockery of our immigration laws and our border security.
As if they weren't already being mocked sufficiently by the scofflaws we now have in power...
If Mexico, Canada, et al want to share a border with us, let them apply to the Congress for statehood.
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.