June 13, 2005
NO WAY TO TREAT A GRAY LADY:
Pro-Trade Democrats Go AWOL (NY Times, 6/13/05)
Back in 1993, Vice President Al Gore went on prime-time television to debate Ross Perot, a foe of free trade, in a clash Mr. Gore is widely believed to have won. The debate helped propel supporters of the North American Free Trade Agreement to victory in a 234-to-200 cliffhanger in the House. Some 102 Democrats - representing the party traditionally more skeptical of liberalized trade - voted for the pact. Afterward, President Bill Clinton called Nafta a defining moment for America. He said the country had decided not to retreat in a world where "change is the only constant." Then he thanked lawmakers, particularly his fellow Democrats, for "voting their consciences."Where are those Democrats now? Fast forward 12 years, and Mr. Clinton's wife, Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton, has yet to decide whether she's going to support the Central American Free Trade Agreement, or Cafta, which would open up trade, valued at $32 billion, between the United States and El Salvador, Guatemala, Honduras, Nicaragua, Costa Rica and the Dominican Republic. Only four Democrats have announced their support, while the list of Democrats against grows ever longer. Last month the influential, centrist New Democrat Coalition of House lawmakers, usually pro-trade, came out against the deal. [...]
Cafta would lower tariffs and help job growth in a needy region. It would encourage growth in the region's textile and apparel industries, a huge helping hand at a time when China is sucking up textile manufacturing jobs. The American Farm Bureau Federation estimates that Cafta would increase United States agricultural exports by $1.5 billion a year. The National Association of Manufacturers says the trade agreement would add $1 billion a year to United States exports of manufactured goods. And a study by the United States International Trade Commission estimates that Cafta, when fully implemented, would cut the trade deficit by $756 million.
"AWOL" seems unfair. It;'s not as if Democrats ever believed in free trade or owed it any kind of allegiance. They've just reverted to anti-capitalist type. Posted by Orrin Judd at June 13, 2005 2:48 PM
Mexican nationals aren't the only Hispanics immigrating here. There's plenty of Guatemalans, Salvadorans, and Nicaraguans. The ones I'm in contact with are big supporters of CAFTA. So much for Democratic outreach.
Posted by: Fred Jacobsen (San Fran) at June 13, 2005 4:39 PMNot being in favor of free trade agreements does not mean you are anti-capitalist. The Republican Party in the 19th Century was always pro-tariff and the Democrats anti-tariff, but which one was the party of Big Business? The only difference is that as an established economy, business leaders have less need to hide behind a tariff and want other countries to not be able to do what they did.
CAFTA is a big win for the US. It helps institutionalize US hegemony in the Western Hemisphere. Furthermore, we need a strong and economically developed Central America. I'd rather have the investment going to Malaysia and other SE Asian nations flow to Latin America as we get more secondary benefits with closer countries being developed.
Posted by: Chris Durnell at June 14, 2005 11:52 AMThe nations of Central America are small. Taken together, they have fewer people than Texas. It is important from a national security perspective to give ordinary Central Americans a stake in continued US prosperity, if nothing else. The negative impact on American labor will be present but not large.
Posted by: bart at June 14, 2005 5:12 PM