FINAL CAFTA VOTE ROLL CALL - How did your Congressman Vote?

CongressionalRecord ^

[Happy2BMe]

FINAL VOTE RESULTS FOR ROLL CALL 443(Republicans in roman; Democrats in italic; Independents underlined)
      H R 3045      RECORDED VOTE      28-Jul-2005      12:03 AM
      QUESTION:  On Passage
      BILL TITLE: Dominican Republic-Central America-United States Free Trade Agreement Implementation Act

	Ayes	Noes	PRES	NV
Republican	202	27		2
Democratic	15	187
Independent		1
TOTALS	217	215		2

---- AYES    217 ---

Aderholt Akin Alexander Bachus Baker Barrett (SC) Bartlett (MD) Barton (TX) Bass Bean Beauprez Biggert Bilirakis Bishop (UT) Blackburn Blunt Boehlert Boehner Bonilla Bonner Bono Boozman Bradley (NH) Brady (TX) Brown (SC) Brown-Waite, Ginny Burgess Burton (IN) Buyer Calvert Camp Cannon Cantor Carter Castle Chabot Chocola Cole (OK) Conaway Cooper Cox Crenshaw Cuellar Culberson Cunningham Davis (KY) Davis, Tom Deal (GA) DeLay Dent Diaz-Balart, L. Diaz-Balart, M. Dicks Doolittle Drake Dreier Duncan Ehlers Emerson English (PA) Everett Feeney Ferguson Fitzpatrick (PA) Flake Foley Forbes Fortenberry Fossella Franks (AZ) Frelinghuysen Gallegly Gerlach

Gibbons Gilchrest Gillmor Gingrey Gohmert Goodlatte Granger Graves Green (WI) Hall Harris Hart Hastert Hastings (WA) Hayes Hayworth Hefley Hensarling Herger Hinojosa Hobson Hoekstra Hulshof Hyde Inglis (SC) Issa Istook Jefferson Jenkins Johnson (CT) Johnson (IL) Johnson, Sam Keller Kelly Kennedy (MN) King (IA) King (NY) Kingston Kirk Kline Knollenberg Kolbe Kuhl (NY) LaHood Latham LaTourette Leach Lewis (CA) Lewis (KY) Linder Lucas Lungren, Daniel E. Manzullo Marchant Matheson McCaul (TX) McCrery McKeon McMorris Meeks (NY) Mica Miller (FL) Miller, Gary Moore (KS) Moran (KS) Moran (VA) Murphy Musgrave Myrick Neugebauer Northup Nunes Nussle

Ortiz Osborne Oxley Pearce Pence Peterson (PA) Petri Pickering Pitts Platts Poe Pombo Porter Price (GA) Pryce (OH) Putnam Radanovich Ramstad Regula Reichert Renzi Reynolds Rogers (AL) Rogers (KY) Rogers (MI) Rohrabacher Ros-Lehtinen Royce Ryan (WI) Ryun (KS) Saxton Schwarz (MI) Sensenbrenner Sessions Shadegg Shaw Shays Sherwood Shimkus Shuster Skelton Smith (TX) Snyder Sodrel Souder Stearns Sullivan Sweeney Tanner Terry Thomas Thornberry Tiahrt Tiberi Towns Turner Upton Walden (OR) Walsh Wamp Weldon (FL) Weldon (PA) Weller Westmoreland Whitfield Wicker Wilson (NM) Wilson (SC) Wolf Young (AK) Young (FL)

---- NOES    215 ---

Abercrombie Ackerman Allen Andrews Baca Baird Baldwin Barrow Becerra Berkley Berman Berry Bishop (GA) Bishop (NY) Blumenauer Boren Boswell Boucher Boustany Boyd Brady (PA) Brown (OH) Brown, Corrine Butterfield Capito Capps Capuano Cardin Cardoza Carnahan Carson Case Chandler Clay Cleaver Clyburn Coble Conyers Costa Costello Cramer Crowley Cubin Cummings Davis (AL) Davis (CA) Davis (FL) Davis (IL) Davis (TN) DeFazio DeGette Delahunt DeLauro Dingell Doggett Doyle Edwards Emanuel Engel Eshoo Etheridge Evans Farr Fattah Filner Ford Foxx Frank (MA) Garrett (NJ) Gonzalez Goode Gordon

Green, Al Green, Gene Grijalva Gutierrez Gutknecht Harman Hastings (FL) Herseth Higgins Hinchey Holden Holt Honda Hooley Hostettler Hoyer Hunter Inslee Israel Jackson (IL) Jackson-Lee (TX) Jindal Johnson, E. B. Jones (NC) Jones (OH) Kanjorski Kaptur Kennedy (RI) Kildee Kilpatrick (MI) Kind Kucinich Langevin Lantos Larsen (WA) Larson (CT) Lee Levin Lewis (GA) Lipinski LoBiondo Lofgren, Zoe Lowey Lynch Mack Maloney Markey Marshall Matsui McCarthy McCollum (MN) McCotter McDermott McGovern McHenry McHugh McIntyre McKinney McNulty Meehan Meek (FL) Melancon Menendez Michaud Millender-McDonald Miller (MI) Miller (NC) Miller, George Mollohan Moore (WI) Murtha Nadler

Napolitano Neal (MA) Ney Norwood Oberstar Obey Olver Otter Owens Pallone Pascrell Pastor Paul Payne Pelosi Peterson (MN) Pomeroy Price (NC) Rahall Rangel Rehberg Reyes Ross Rothman Roybal-Allard Ruppersberger Rush Ryan (OH) Sabo Salazar Sánchez, Linda T. Sanchez, Loretta Sanders Schakowsky Schiff Schwartz (PA) Scott (GA) Scott (VA) Serrano Sherman Simmons Simpson Slaughter Smith (NJ) Smith (WA) Solis Spratt Stark Strickland Stupak Tancredo Tauscher Taylor (MS) Thompson (CA) Thompson (MS) Tierney Udall (CO) Udall (NM) Van Hollen Velázquez Visclosky Wasserman Schultz Waters Watson Watt Waxman Weiner Wexler Woolsey Wu Wynn

---- NOT VOTING    2 ---

Davis, Jo Ann

Taylor (NC)

---

[eleni121]

Well my congress critter sold out the middle class yet again.
_______________________________________________________

In what way? Salaries have consistently risen over the last 10 years.

Sounds to me like you are another sour "sky is falling type" uncomfortable with change and some competition.

[Tulane]

Didn't say it was bad...but when the automobile came, horse and buggy makers had to change jobs.

[Tulane]

I forgot to post this:

We're Dooooooooomed!

Bush's fault!!

The sky is falling!!

[Alberta's Child]

I agree with the general tone of your post, but it contains a number of misconceptions and factual errors that are often accepted as reality in discussions on this topic:

If this isn't done, you end up with other countries "dumping" their products on us until our competing industry segment ceases to exist. Then the other country raises the price of that product and there's nothing you can do about it, as you have no competing product.

If you can name a single instance in which a company or an nation was able to implement this kind of strategy successfully, I'd love to hear about it. One of the advantages of our modern economy is that money flows very freely from investors to entrepreneurs -- which means that anyone with a solid business plan can secure the necessary financing and get even a complex operation up and running in a fairly short time. "Dumping" never works because the producer that dumps his product on the market can never raise prices high enough to adequately cover his prior losses.

In others, the disparity in standard of living (India) is such that their workers can afford to live on much lower wages.

This disparity in standard of living is precisely what drives an economy, for an imbalance in wages, incomes, etc. provides the necessary incentives for a producer to develop the capacity to produce something and find the customers to buy it. A uniform standard of living in any closed system results in a stagnant economy -- because it makes no sense to hire someone to do something unless it is cheaper for them to do it than for you to do it. This is why there are more Mexican landscapers in a typical U.S. suburban area than in all of Mexico.

This means that you end up in the situation we're finding ourselves in: 90% of the products in your house are made in China and when you call technical support on your Dell computer (most of the parts therein made in Taiwan) you end up speaking to someone in Delhi.

Just think of what you are saying here, particularly with regard to Dell computers. Our standard of living has become so high in this era of free trade that a personal computer more complex than anything NASA or the U.S. Defense Department used prior to the mid-1980s has become almost as common in U.S. homes as a toaster.

[Colorado Doug]

As a small manufacturer of 24 employees servicing other companies in 2002 we are now a company of 4 employees.

Well, no problem, one of the "free traitors" has already suggested that your former employees can just retrain themselves and do much better anyway. You must be lazy or you would do the same, rather than try to hang on to your business. /sarcasm-off

[hedgetrimmer]

any government should be about removing the barriers to free trade.

Considering that our government is predicated on protecting the rights of the individual, there is a huge conflict here. What you "free traders" are saying is that trade trumps everything, including the purposes of the US Constitution.

If individual rights are protected, then tariffs, and revenue generated by tariffs are welcome.

If corporate "rights" (these are not officially recognized by the Constitution) are protected, then eliminating revenue generating tariffs are the name of the game.

What you are saying here, it that "free traders" are changing the character of our government from its original intent to protect individuals, to a different intent, protect corporations that want foreign trade. Worse yet, these corporations always want to trade services with the lowest cost labor. By elevating perceived corporate rights over individual rights, we are seeing a resurgence of slavery in this country and abroad. The law of the jungle prevails when individuals no longer have constitutional authority over their own lives. That leads to a decline in freedom and individual liberty for all.

[Das Outsider]

This is how the OBLs do it.

You've hit a new low, Dane. Even the MoveOns could think of something better than that. Nancy Pelosi? Come on, now.

Do you really want to paint everyone against CAFTA with that brush? We can go that road, if you'd like. We can expose who the real liberals are.

Save everyone the bandwith, time, energy, and effort and cut out the fifth-rate propaganda.

[TXBSAFH]

I know three people personally that have had their lives and careers negative effected by nafta. Unrestricted fre trade is hurting the middle class.

[Tulane]

We just disagree on whether trade benefits the country (and more individuals than not. We'll see.

[Tulane]

That's not what the staitstics show. Anecdotal evidence aside.

[jpsb]

"I'm simply stunned at the ignorance of economics and history on here"

That is surprising since you do not appear to know any.

[Tulane]

Slavery?!! Please provide an example of slavery in the US.

[Alberta's Child]

CAFTA trade decisions will be determined by an appointed three person Regulatory Board, not a one of them need be American or appointed by the US Congress.

If you think the United States has any intention of honoring any decisions by this regulatory board that it thinks will be destructive to our business interests, you're dreaming.

I offer the Canadian softwood lumber tariff dispute as irrefutable proof of this. The United States levied a steep tariff on Canadian lumber back in 2001, in response to what it claimed was an illegal government subsidy for lumber producers in Canada. The U.S. and Canada have been fighting over this dispute before various trade boards ever since, and Canada has won every single time it has come up before these boards for NAFTA, GATT, etc. It is now four years later, and the damn tariff is still there.

(Ironically, the tariff has also helped destroy the U.S. lumber industry in the process, but that's a whole other story!)

[Ex-expromissor]

"So you're saying Costa Ricans are going to build weapons based on Cafta? Huh?

I never said nor implied that. I was responding to another post which contained "We hope we won't have to buy any weapons from China to defend ourselves from China." 175 posted on 07/28/2005 10:32:22 AM PDT by captnorb.

My turn... Huh???

[jpsb]

"I'm simply stunned at the ignorance of economics and history on here"

Completely untrue statement, NAFTA wiped out millions of small land owner farmers in the interior of Mexico. They could not compete with our huge arga farms, but since they must feed thier families too, many millions of them marched north to the usa. And that's a fact jack.

[Stellar Dendrite]

"though CAFTA is only a very small trade agreement,"

LOL, you call 24 thousand pages "very small"?

[TXBSAFH]

I have seen it. And I will do whatever I can to oppose free trade. And as for all those who worship the free market, I have a question how do you think you can have free market trading with markets that are not free? See China.

[Tulane]

Not the agreement---the amount of trade it affects/ will affect.

[Tulane]

Nice strawman...the ratification of CAFTA has nothing to do with the US government's refusal to enforce trade laws against China.

[Tulane]

By the way, how do you think the economies of protectionis states have fared over the years...china aside?