Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

LaTourette voted on CAFTA before getting tariff report
The Plain Dealer ^ | August 14, 2005 | Stephen Koff

Posted on 08/15/2005 10:15:16 PM PDT by hedgetrimmer

Washington- Don't blame President Bush's trade ambassador.

Yes, he urged Rep. Steve LaTourette to support the controversial Central American Free Trade Agreement. And LaTourette in the end did, voting with colleagues in the middle of the night and surprising scores of people who had believed him when he said he intended to vote no.

But U.S. Trade Representative Rob Portman apparently is touchy about how people see his role in a matter that has blown up in LaTourette's face. And as the week ended, he let people know it.

A Plain Dealer examination last week showed that the Lake County Republican's explanation for his July 28 vote was built upon a set of phony reasons.

LaTourette had said he voted for CAFTA in order to eliminate plywood tariffs that were squeezing KraftMaid, the Middlefield- based kitchen cabinet maker. Without some relief, LaTourette said, KraftMaid might have to move jobs out of the United States.

LaTourette's office said the congressman based this belief not only on a conversation with KraftMaid president Tom Chieffe the afternoon before the vote, but also on a document listing base tariffs, provided by Portman's office after the Chieffe conversation.

That document made it appear as if KraftMaid and others are indeed paying 8 percent tariffs on the plywood they import from Central America.

But The Plain Dealer documented that due to other trade regulations, Central American plywood already is exempt from tariffs due; that no company is getting dinged, let along squeezed, by such purported tariffs, and that those who relied on lists of base tariffs from Port man's office would be mistaken.

That caused Portman, like LaTourette, to get some unwelcome attention.

And so Portman, who lives in Cincinnati when not in Washington or traveling, on Friday called into "The Whistleblower," a widely read Cincinnati-based Web log, according to Jim Schifrin, the blog publisher.

Portman apparently wanted it known that he had not "arm- twisted" LaTourette, as the blog suggested Thursday when mentioning The Plain Dealer story. The blog is widely disseminated by e-mail.

In fact, according to Schifrin, Portman told him that it was not until well after the CAFTA vote that Portman's office sent LaTourette the document that listed base tariffs.

Portman's press secretary, Neena Moorjani, confirmed the same to The Plain Dealer, and said the document wasn't sent until Aug. 5 - eight days after the CAFTA vote.

That's a far cry from LaTourette's staff-written statement that said LaTourette asked Portman about the issue before the vote and that Portman's office "provided the congressman with a document . . ." The statement failed to mention that LaTourette's office asked for the document more than a week after the fact.

LaTourette's district director, Dino DiSanto, late Friday acknowledged that LaTourette did not have the document from Portman at the time of the vote. But he said LaTourette had basically the same information because his office had looked it up on the trade representative's Web site.

"I think getting information from the Web site is what we did," DiSanto said. He acknowledged the office only sought the hard document from Portman's office after The Plain Dealer started asking about the tariff issue.

This all might appear nit-picky - whether a Web site or a hard document, it's all data - but it apparently matters to Portman. The Whistleblower, after all, is read by a lot of people in his hometown.

Portman's point, says Schifrin, was that if the information on tariffs was sent after the vote, "how could it have been made to influence the vote"

That doesn't mean, however, that Portman didn't try to twist LaTourette's arm some other way. LaTourette said in an interview after the CAFTA vote that Portman's office had called to ask if LaTourette wanted anything, implying that perhaps a bridge or construction project might be available for his district. LaTourette insisted his vote was not for sale.

Whether he ultimately will get something - or whether he gave away his vote - is one of the many questions surrounding the matter. So far LaTourette has avoided making a personal comment, having been in Alaska on a congressional trip and then going on vacation last week. KraftMaid's Chieffe, for two weeks, has declined through a spokeswoman a request for an interview or comment. Chieffe's boss at parent company Masco Corp., Richard Manoogian, a major Republican Party donor, also will not comment.

Told the tale of the document, Chris Slevin, a critic of the LaTourette vote, maintained that Portman and his office still were not absolved for LaTourette's faulty information, because "it's clear the information they provided was misleading," even if it was provided later.

"But," added Slevin, deputy director of Public Citizen's Global Trade Watch, "I think the responsibility still lies with the congressman to research the facts before casting a vote."


TOPICS: Business/Economy; Constitution/Conservatism; Foreign Affairs; Government; News/Current Events; US: Ohio
KEYWORDS: cafta; corruption; freetrade; nafta; obl2bscrewedhaha; phonyconservative; rino; rinowatch; sovereignty; wto
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061 next last
1. LaTourette had said he voted for CAFTA in order to eliminate plywood tariffs that were squeezing KraftMaid, the Middlefield- based kitchen cabinet maker. Without some relief, LaTourette said, KraftMaid might have to move jobs out of the United States

2. a document listing base tariffs, provided by [USTR]Portman's office ... made it appear as if KraftMaid and others are indeed paying 8 percent tariffs on the plywood they import from Central America.

3.due to other trade regulations, Central American plywood already is exempt from tariffs due; that no company is getting dinged, let along squeezed, by such purported tariffs,

4.Portman told him that it was not until well after the CAFTA vote that Portman's office sent LaTourette the document that listed base tariffs

5. LaTourette did not have the document from Portman at the time of the vote. But he said LaTourette had basically the same information because his office had looked it up on the trade representative's Web site.

6.after the CAFTA vote that Portman's office had called to ask if LaTourette wanted anything, implying that perhaps a bridge or construction project might be available for his district.


1 posted on 08/15/2005 10:15:17 PM PDT by hedgetrimmer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: JesseJane; Justanobody; B4Ranch; Nowhere Man; Coleus; neutrino; endthematrix; investigateworld; ...

CAFTA-- lies and bribes lead to passage.

CAFTA PING

If you want on or off the list, let me know.


2 posted on 08/15/2005 10:17:24 PM PDT by hedgetrimmer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: hedgetrimmer
lies and bribes lead to passage.

Welcome to the legislative process.
3 posted on 08/15/2005 10:21:05 PM PDT by Terpfen (Liberals call the Constitution a living document because they enjoy torturing it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: hedgetrimmer

The reason lies and bribes seem to be what paved the way for CAFTA is because the majority of Americans are not nationalists that understand America will be made or broken by foreign investment into our corporate companies. We must allow inefficeint markets such as farming to fade itself out instead of allowing the government to subsidize money losing industries.


4 posted on 08/15/2005 10:22:57 PM PDT by lightislife
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: hedgetrimmer
So now he starts acting as if he has Tourettes's syndrome?
5 posted on 08/15/2005 10:24:00 PM PDT by Paleo Conservative (France is an example of retrograde chordate evolution.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: lightislife
We must allow inefficeint markets such as farming to fade itself out instead of allowing the government to subsidize money losing industries.

Oh, yes. Always a good idea to allow other countries to supply us with frivolous items like FOOD. Good grief, have any of you people ever read a history book??

Or (and more likely) why doesn't the U.S.A. as an entity matter to you?

6 posted on 08/15/2005 10:30:41 PM PDT by garandgal
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Paleo Conservative

Hopefully, the good Congressman got the courtesy of a reach .....d.


7 posted on 08/15/2005 10:32:36 PM PDT by investigateworld ( God bless Poland for giving the world JP II & a Protestant bump for his Sainthood!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: lightislife
Farming is not inefficient in this country. It is a vastly over regulated enterprise.

Your understanding of the American system of government seems lacking.... It is not up to the government to force people out of business. The purpose of the government is to leave people alone to do what they want to for a living. By over regulation, they are placing a burden on the agricultural industry that other industries do not have to bear. The government is also using agriculture as a bargaining chip with Africa and Asian third world countries for trade. It is not the place of the federal government to negotiate away citizens rights at the global trade table.

Your opinions seem to be shaped by the idea that a global command economy is best for America, and I take exception to that. The globalist say that a country should produce only 25% of what it needs to function, it should import everything else. There is no freedom when an government has that much control over the lives of its citizens and the work they want to do.
8 posted on 08/15/2005 10:34:51 PM PDT by hedgetrimmer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: garandgal

I bet you also oppose the cheap labor Mexicans provide us. The fact is if we allowed the market to be efficient and let employers determine how to run their business then we would still have steel in America. But, we let unions get in our way and drive business out of the country because of the cost of operation. The fact is we can cut down the percentage of our income that we spend on the items that don't help us gain ground in the world market. I believe this will help American big business grow and expand its horizons around the world.


9 posted on 08/15/2005 10:35:59 PM PDT by lightislife
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: lightislife
America will be made or broken by foreign investment into our corporate companies

America is much greater than your opinion of Her. America and America's freedoms have been the pinnacle of human evolution. The globalist "free traders" are out to destroy those freedoms by decimating the country through open borders, wage deflation, outsourcing, offshoring and "sustainable development". "Free traders" prefer slaves to free people.
10 posted on 08/15/2005 10:39:23 PM PDT by hedgetrimmer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: hedgetrimmer

Central and South America will never gain much influence by selling Food and Cheap Labor. As long as we gain ground in the technology other countries will depend on to grow out of a 3rd world nation, we will remain a powerful world force. The fact is, trade barriers is over regulation. If we passed a fair tax along with Free Trade agreements, America will attract many investors that will save the USD against the unified Euro.


11 posted on 08/15/2005 10:41:15 PM PDT by lightislife
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: lightislife
I bet you also oppose the cheap labor Mexicans provide us

How can a business model be considered viable if the employer has to break the law to make a profit? Why, in a country founded on the rule of law, would you want a businessman to build his business model on illegal labor?
12 posted on 08/15/2005 10:41:53 PM PDT by hedgetrimmer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: lightislife

Did you ever take a civics class?


13 posted on 08/15/2005 10:42:35 PM PDT by hedgetrimmer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: hedgetrimmer

So you blame companies that move out of America because of high costs, now you blame the government on trying to lower the cost for thee business'


14 posted on 08/15/2005 10:43:40 PM PDT by lightislife
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: hedgetrimmer

I'm a nationalist so I was very disturbed afterward.


15 posted on 08/15/2005 10:44:16 PM PDT by lightislife
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: lightislife
I bet you also oppose the cheap labor Mexicans provide us.

No, I opposed "government-subsidized" illegal immigrant labor. You know, the type where employers pay a third world wage, knowing that taxpayers will fund healthcare, education, etc. etc. etc.

The fact is we can cut down the percentage of our income that we spend on the items that don't help us gain ground in the world market.

There is nothing that we do that cannot be done by slaves elsewhere in the world for less money. And support for forfeiting defense-related industries (like steel); or basic necessities like food is idiotic.

Why you globalists continue to blather this utopianism in the face of the perfect example of what happens when you rely on other countries for basic necessities is beyond me. I am of course, talking about oil. What do you think would happen if we got into a major war having given away our steel industry?

16 posted on 08/15/2005 11:02:48 PM PDT by garandgal
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: garandgal

The reason our steel industry went out of business is because labor was too expensive. Many other industries are facing the same difficulty while housing has couped by using cheap labor. And the fact is, the only way our Oil companies and Universities can find an alternate energy source is by relying on investments.

We must allow American big business to operate as efficiently as possible while we are in the transition stage of entering a world economy.


17 posted on 08/15/2005 11:09:45 PM PDT by lightislife
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: lightislife

Just posted, and written with you in mind. The most brilliant conservative economist alive writes:

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1464158/posts

Read it and weep regarding illegal immigration. Or you would if you were conservative (which you are obviously not).


18 posted on 08/15/2005 11:34:44 PM PDT by garandgal
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: garandgal

i guess Bush isn't a conservative either huh?


19 posted on 08/15/2005 11:38:57 PM PDT by lightislife
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: hedgetrimmer

LaTourette? isnt that the teacher that married the kid? or am I thinking of Latourette's syndrome?


20 posted on 08/15/2005 11:40:10 PM PDT by isom35
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson