Posted on 01/11/2006 11:16:53 PM PST by hedgetrimmer
The Central American Free Trade Agreement-Dominican Republic is struggling to get on its feet after six Central American countries, including the Dominican Republic, failed to meet a Jan. 1 preliminary start-up date.
All CAFTA countries have ratified the agreement with the exception of Costa Rica, El Salvador being the first in December 2004 and Nicaragua the most recent in September 2005.
"All countries recognized the Jan.1 date was an ambitious goal and that they might not have completed their implementation process by that time," said Stephen Norton, spokesman for the U.S. Trade Representative office.
At issue are the "technical changes" the nations must make in customs procedures and regulations regarding intellectual property rights, telecommunications and procurement.
Portman said countries will come on line under a "rolling process" when they have completed the implementation process to USTR satisfaction, including a presidential proclamation from each nation.
CAFTA-DR’s troubles have invigorated hope among opponents that the trade agreement could be derailed.
But Burke Stansbury, executive director for the Committee in Solidarity with the People of El Salvador, a U.S. based group opposing CAFTA-DR, said it’s unlikely the agreement will fall apart but"we are not giving up."
"From day one the Bush administration has been trying to ram CAFTA down people’s throats, with little substantive debate and despite voices of tremendous opposition," he said. "In Costa Rica they have failed, and in other countries it took repression and dirty tactics to ratify CAFTA."
Stansbury likened CAFTA-DR to an "investors’ and corporate" rights agreement for the United States and U.S. corporations.
"U.S. corporations want strict fines and penalties in place before they set up their businesses there," he said. "The USTR is demanding each nation to come up with a whole list of reforms that align with CAFTA."
That amounts to constitutional or domestic law rewrites for each country involved, said Tom Rickert, co-director of the Quioxte Center, a Maryland based group opposing CAFTA-DR.
"The problems associated with implementing CAFTA demonstrates what we’ve been saying all along: This agreement goes beyond trade in requiring dramatic changes in domestic laws that grant new rights to transnational corporations at the expense of working people," he said.
Ricker also said CAFTA was being used as a mechanism to "re-energize the Free Trade Area of the Americas agreement."
The FTAA intends to bring every country in the Western Hemisphere under one free-trade umbrella -- possibly to the point of a common currency, the Amero, similar to the European Union’s Euro.
Norton supported the idea of CAFTA-DR being a forerunner to FTAA when he said," Successful CAFTA-DR implementation is critical to the broader U.S. policy goals for the Americas of strengthening democratic governance, expanding economic opportunity, and investing in people."
Stansbury said, too, CAFTA-DR goes beyond other free-trade agreements in that it prohibits countries from discriminating against "trade in-services" or "basic social services being managed by a foreign country."
"It opens the way for foreign industry to manage services that have been traditionally managed by the state," he said.
When asked if that stipulation means a Central American national could become a local fire chief or police chief in the United States, Stansbury said, "It is possible."
CAFTA-DR funding
United States
The United States’ Trade Capacity Building policy gives financial aid to countries to align them with free trade agreements. USAID is another agency used to appropriate U.S. funds to bolster a nation's trade capabilities.
A partial listing of money being funneled into CAFTA countries include:
* Honduras -- $215 million
* Nicaragua -- $175 million
* Potential for similar amounts in 2006 for other CAFTA countries is provided by the Millennium Challenge Corporation appropriating U.S. funds -- Condoleeza Rice, chairman
* President’s FY2006 Budget Request: approximately $200 million for the region in development and capacity-building.
Inter American Development Bank (United States is a member) in a 2005-2009 loan pipeline for trade capacity building:
* Costa Rica -- $417 million
* El Salvador -- $375 million
* Dominican Republic -- $285 million
* Guatemala -- $281 million
* Honduras -- $142 million
* Nicaragua -- $103 million
World Bank (United States is a member)
* Over $1.14 billion in already approved loans in support of CAFTA’s reform agenda. Loans include financing for roads, ports, electricity, customs modernization, reductions in costs of doing business, rural development, strengthening governance and institutions.
Source: Office of the United States Trade Representative
Hill said that striking a deal with the United States would be hugely beneficial to Vietnam, whose exports to the United States are four to five times greater than its imports.
***
But not to American citizens.
Anyone who disagrees with CAFTA is on the same side as CISPES! The slimebuckets who made Ronald Reagan's life hell. CAFTA is Reagan's Plan for the hemisphere and we honor Ronald Reagan by getting it through as fast as we can.
CAFTA, NAFTA, TRASHTA, GATT, FTAA, WTO, UN.
All are alliances which are not Constitutional for the united states of America to be tangled in.
You set up a fraudulent system that steals sovereignty from all creating an incipient global government and give it the phony name of "free trade". You take tax money from hard working Americans to give away to countries chosen as LDCs by a group of global socialist bureaucrats operating out of Switzerland as "aid for trade" and "trade capacity building". You set up rules that undermine US rule of law, Americans are penalized by an unconstitutional tribunal in a global institution where they have no elected representation. Why do you think American citizens are opposed to it?
Ronald Reagan: Protectionist
He advocated protectionism early in his 1980 campaign, saying to the U.S. auto industry: "Japan is part of the problem. This is where government can be legitimately involved. That is, to convince the Japanese in one way or another that, in their own interests, that deluge of cars must be slowed while our industry gets back on its feet..."
When he imposed a 100% tariff on selected Japanese electronic products for allegedly "dumping" computer memory chips, he said he did it "to enforce the principles of free and fair trade."
Treasury Secretary James A. Baker has boasted about the protectionist record: Reagan "has granted more import relief to U.S. industry than any of his predecessors in more than half a century."
He:
Raised tariffs on Canadian lumber and cedar shingles;
Removed third-world countries on several occasions from the duty-free import program for developing nations;
Imposed a 45% duty on Japanese motorcycles for the benefit of Harley Davidson
Demanded that Taiwan, West Germany, Japan, and Switzerland restrain their exports of machine tools;
Tightened considerably the quotas on imported sugar;
If you have something to say to me, say it in the forum unless I ask you for private mail.
Capiche?
L
And let's kill NAFTA while we're at it. George Bush and the politicians in DC can't wait to redistribute America's wealth (what a laugh we don't have any) to the rest of the world through these treasonous treaties.
America is borrowing money by the trillions to finance Bush's New World Order. We can't pay any of the money we owe because our enemies here in America are impoverishing millions of Americans by job outsourcing, and the insourcing illegal Mexicans. Everyday millions of citzens are being forced out of their jobs, and companies are leaving America at a record pace. If anyone survives Bush's new world it will be the crooked politicians and greedy business people. The rest of us will be slaves.
Those industries on your "Reagan" list? How are they doing now?
Wow. Business must have really taken off after the tariffs were lifted.
The World Bank estimates that import restrictions in 1984 had the same effect as a 66% income tax surcharge on America's poorest citizens. Less obvious is the harm to American producers, who lose exports and pay more for capital goods because of protectionism. For example, everyone, including the beleaguered American auto industry, has to pay more for steel because of the Reagan administration's restrictions on imports. Even the steel industry is hurt because artificially high prices stimulate the search for alternative materials.
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.