|
|
|
LABOR
UNIONS TO FIGHT FREE TRADE DEAL
Publication:
The Miami Herald
Printed: Thursday, December 18, 2003
Written by: Martin Crutsinger, Associated Press |
WASHINGTON - The Bush administration is hailing
its new free trade agreement
with Central America as an important milestone toward the even bigger
prize
of achieving a hemisphere-wide free trade area.
But labor unions are vowing an all-out effort to defeat the measure in
Congress.
Judging from the initial reaction from unions and such politically sensitive
sectors of the economy as textile makers and sugar growers, President
Bush
could be facing a major trade battle on Capitol Hill in the midst of
next
year's presidential campaign.
The Central American Free Trade Agreement would be the United States'
sixth
free trade agreement, all modeled along the lines of the 10-year-old
North
American Free Trade Agreement, which links the United States, Mexico
and
Canada.
The CAFTA pact announced Wednesday would cover Guatemala, El Salvador,
Honduras and Nicaragua. A fifth nation, Costa Rica, abruptly dropped
out of
the talks on Tuesday. However, administration officials said they hoped
further negotiations in coming weeks would persuade Costa Rica to join
the
agreement before it is sent to Congress.
U.S. Trade Representative Robert Zoellick called CAFTA "an important
milestone" along the way to the administration's big prize of a
34-nation
Free Trade Agreement of the Americas, covering all countries in the Western
Hemisphere except Cuba.
While the administration won easy approval earlier this year of two other
free trade deals with Singapore and Chile, CAFTA is shaping up as a much
bigger battle.
American unions, and their Democratic allies in Congress, were upset
that
the agreement does not include stronger labor protections.
AFL-CIO President John Sweeney said lax enforcement of weak laws on the
books of the Central American countries meant young women were forced
to
work long hours in unsafe conditions for poverty wages and workers trying
to
form unions faced threats and intimidation.
"We will do everything in our power to defeat this deeply flawed
agreement," Sweeney said in a statement.
Rep. Dick Gephardt, who is campaigning for the Democratic presidential
nomination, called CAFTA "yet another example of the Bush administration
selling out American workers with a bad trade deal."
Several other Democrats questioned whether the administration really
had a
finished deal, noting that certain provisions on service sectors were
yet to
be completed, and the negotiations with Costa Rica were still ongoing.
In addition, the administration has said it hoped to add a sixth Latin
American country, the island nation of the Dominican Republic, in talks
early next year in hopes of picking up votes among lawmakers whose districts
include large numbers of Dominican immigrants.
Sen. Max Baucus, D-Mont., called the administration's announcement "premature.
Too many important issues remain open to declare these negotiations successfully
concluded."
Key Republicans in Congress and U.S. business groups generally expressed
support for the deal. Senate Finance Committee Chairman Charles Grassley,
R-Iowa, said he believed the deal would boost exports of Iowa farm products.
Trade is expected to be a major issue in next year's
presidential race with
Bush's Democratic opponents charging that the administration has failed
to
provide help to a U.S. manufacturing sector that has suffered 40 consecutive
months of job losses that have wiped out 2.8 million jobs.
The success in reaching the Central American deal gave the Bush
administration a badly needed victory after a series of setbacks in
trade, including the collapse of global trade talks in Cancun, Mexico,
a forced
compromise with Brazil over the areas that will be covered by a Free
Trade
of the Americas Agreement and Bush's about-face earlier this month
in deciding to withdraw protective tariffs on steel in the face of
threatened
European and Asian retaliation.
The administration did negotiate special provisions to protect domestic
textile manufacturers and sugar beet and sugar cane farmers, but officials
in both industries said they were concerned that the deals still went
too
far in opening their sectors to foreign competition.
Lawmakers from sugar states said they viewed the CAFTA increase as
a dangerous precedent for future free trade deals being negotiated
with
such
countries as Australia and Brazil.
Textile manufacturers were concerned about what they saw as potential
loopholes that will provide duty-free access to the United States of
some
clothing assembled from textiles produced outside the CAFTA countries.
|
|