CAFTA Debate Open Thread

The CAFTA Debate is on C-SPAN right now.  This is an open thread for discussing it.

Previous Speakers:

For - Bill Thomas, R-CA
Against - Charles Rangel, D-NY
Against - Charlie Norwood, R-GA
For - William Jefferson, D-LA
Against - Ben Cardin, D-MD
For - Jim Moran, D-VA

The debate started at around 7:15, and will go to around 9:15, if I understand correctly.  Then, there will be a vote which will last as long as DeLay wants.  The main argument of "For" is "It's not too bad".

•  Coble (R-NC)

  Rangel puts 6 pages of Central American religious organizations into the record.

  Now Howard Coble, R-NC, is speaking against.

  by Power on Wed Jul 27, 2005 at 05:51:02 PM PDT

•  Cuellar (D-TX)

  A third Democrat in favor of the bill is speaking now.  "It is deeply in our national interest."

  by Power on Wed Jul 27, 2005 at 05:53:09 PM PDT

  •  asdf

    He's mentioning the "US products face tariffs in Central America, Central American products don't face tariffs in US".  Also claims that free trade is good, thus the bill is good.

    by Power on Wed Jul 27, 2005 at 05:54:41 PM PDT

•  Sander Levin (D-MI)

  This is another free-trade supporter who is opposing this bill.  "Misses an historic opportunity".

  by Power on Wed Jul 27, 2005 at 05:56:57 PM PDT

  •  More Sander

    Only requires the governments to enforce their own laws, doesn't say anything about what those laws are.  A standard used nowhere else, a race to the bottom for labor standards.

    It repeals an existing labor agreement which is better for labor rights.

    It won't help to build a middle class.

    Claims that this will hurt national security, not help it, because it will encourage poverty.

    The bill needs to be defeated and renegotiated.

    by Power on Wed Jul 27, 2005 at 05:59:16 PM PDT

•  What about Congressman Ford?

  Also, on an earlier thread someone stated Congressman Wamp and some North Carolina Repubs were against it.  Does anyone know?  I seriously doubt it.  
  I posted it up at our party website so when Wamp votes in favor of it, I can point out special interests must have gotten to him.  
  http://hamdems.org  

  by Sandy on Signal on Wed Jul 27, 2005 at 05:57:06 PM PDT

•  FOR: Ron Lewis (R-KY)

  US is "on the sidelines while other nations trade".

  Supports fast-track negotiation.

  Debate has gone on for a long time.

  Most important: "Levels the playing field".

  80% of imports from CAFTA countries duty-free, opens markets to US goods.  This means jobs for workers and farmers.

  Will allow the region to compete against China in textiles.

  Shows our commitment to the leaders of Central American countries.

  "Finish the job, and pass CAFTA now."

  by Power on Wed Jul 27, 2005 at 06:02:43 PM PDT

•  AGAINST: Walter Jones (R-NC)

  You may remember him as being one of the anti-Iraq War republicans.

  "This is not what we need for American workers, not what we need for Central America."

  NAFTA has been a failure for the American worker.  It has increased illegal immigration by 350%, it doesn't work.

  "CAFTA is NAFTA's ugly cousin".  It is not very attractive at all.

  Received a letter from legislators in Central American countries.  CAFTA market has only 9 million who can buy goods, should be defeated.

  "This CAFTA bill will not help the people of Central America."

  We have lost so many manufacturing jobs.  How sad will it be when we have to order tanks from China in 15 years, and the flag says "Made in China".  "Let's defeat this evil bill called CAFTA".

  by Power on Wed Jul 27, 2005 at 06:05:47 PM PDT

•  FOR: John Linder (R-GA)

  He is the "flat tax" guy.

  He voted for NAFTA.

  Textiles left Georgia, but unemployment drops.

  We pay people more because otherwise they wouldn't come back and we'd have to retrain them.

  "This is a modest foreign policy agreement", "It will make them safer and us safer."

  China would have been considered to rule the world, but it built walls.  This is tearing down walls.

  by Power on Wed Jul 27, 2005 at 06:08:09 PM PDT

  •  unfortunately

    Unemployment is rising in Georgia again, it seems.

    by jj32 on Wed Jul 27, 2005 at 06:51:18 PM PDT

•  AGAINST: Jim McDermott

  He posts here, and is quoted in Fahrenheit 9/11.

  "Why are we passing this Central American Free Trade Agreement?"  Bush says "We've had a marvelous year".  McDermott objects.  Our trade deficit is at a record high.  Does this help?

  The combined economies of the 6 countries is $85 billion GDP, equivalent to Tampa, Florida.  They have poor workers, hard workers.  They try to immigrate here because of that.  If we keep them there, who wins in that?

  No labor protections, no unions, no health care, no education, no worker safety.  But we get a cheap work force.

  NAFTA didn't stop illegal immigration from Mexico, this won't stop it.  They aren't stupid, they know 50c/hour there is worse than menial jobs here.

  Did we negotiate with the workers?  No.  They have an elite who control the country and have for centuries and all we are doing is giving them more power to control the workers.  We are setting no example for the world.

  by Power on Wed Jul 27, 2005 at 06:12:29 PM PDT

•  FOR: Kevin Brady (R-TX)

  Mentions trade agreements with Jordan, Singapore, and Morocco.  Why are we refusing to offer the same  hand to "our Hispanic neighbors" in Central America.

  We can't turn our back on 44 million customers in Central America.

  We can't win the textile war with China unless we have CAFTA.

  We can't be "the world's beacon of freedom if we turn our back on Central America".  There has been remarkable progress over the past 20 years in Central America.  They have pulled up the ladder of democracy.  Opponents suggest kicking them down, we need to offer a hand to pull them up.

  We must not abandon our commitment to Central America.

  This is a test, we cannot fail.

  by Power on Wed Jul 27, 2005 at 06:15:00 PM PDT

•  Against: Butch Otter (R-ID)

  Rangel calls him from Indiana first.  He says "The gentleman from Indiana objects".

  He's a salesman.  He negotiates trade agreements for his potatoes.  He's sold the most potatoes of anyone in the Congress.

  He cannot flimflam about his results in negotiation.  If you support this agreement, put your job on the line.  If the results don't happen, quit your job in 2 years.  I wouldn't risk your job on this if I were you.

  We've experienced NAFTA.  Invoking the founding fathers.  Quotes Washington "If to please the people we promise that which we disprove, how are we going to defend our work".

  Scattered applause.

  by Power on Wed Jul 27, 2005 at 06:17:42 PM PDT

•  FOR: Chris Chocola (R-IN)

  Has spent adult life in manufacturing, supports CAFTA.

  When trying to export goods, no tariffs is a good thing.  You are more competitive, sell more products, more jobs.  Make decisions based on facts.

  82% of trade deficit is from countries we don't have trade agreements with.  96% of the world's consumers are outside the US.

  If we are serious about reducing trade deficits, we need to tear down walls, CAFTA does this.

  by Power on Wed Jul 27, 2005 at 06:19:22 PM PDT

•  AGAINST: Xavier Becerra (D-CA)

  "Trust but verify".  Governments want to.  But we need to know the rules will be followed before opening it.  This agreement fails Reagan's test.  If the American public knew we were doing this on "good faith", they'd run us out of Washington.

  China pirates US goods, pays 60c/hour.  This agreement will do the same thing, but closer than China.  Will they trade under US standards or China standards.

  This will be a race to the bottom, and nobody will win.  It's better to lift all boats.

  Has supported every trade agreement in 12 years, doesn't support this one, it doesn't work.  Vote No.

  by Power on Wed Jul 27, 2005 at 06:21:59 PM PDT

•  FOR: Paul Ryan (R-WI)

  Markets are already open to Central America.

  Claims they say "it encourages companies to relocate".  It already does this.  To sell products to them, we have to build it there to avoid tariffs.  This simply opens their markets.

  This is "Fair Trade", treating us as we treat them.

  35% tariff on US corn will be eliminated.  20% tariff on US soybeans will be eliminated.  Manufacturing tariffs eliminated.  Keeps jobs in Wisconsin.  Good for our economy.  Bad for labor?  Stronger than Morocco agreement.  Strongest to date.  "Anti-democracy movement is trying to stop this".  Vote Democracy.  Support CAFTA.

  by Power on Wed Jul 27, 2005 at 06:24:29 PM PDT

•  AGAINST: Ron Paul (R-TX)

  He's the libertarian, "Dr. No".

  He frequently votes no in the House.  Looks at Article 1, Section 8 for authority.  One is foreign commerce.  Congress has authority.  This violates that provision.

  Congress has illegally transferred to the president and to a foreign agency.  It is unconstitutional and a threat to our sovereignty.

  If we were interested in free trade, we could do it in 1 paragraph.  This is 1000 pages.  This is not free trade.  "This is regulated, managed trade for special interests."

  Codex alimentarians (sp), regulations from the WTO, approved by EU, gives a form to complain.  If you want to buy vitamins without a prescription, vote against.  If you want international harmonization of vitamins, vote for this.

  by Power on Wed Jul 27, 2005 at 06:27:46 PM PDT

•  FOR: Dan Burton (R-IN)

  Clay Shaw claims it is constitutional.

  Refers to the Sandanistas in Nicaragua.  All the wrangling in this place.  The killings in El Salvador.  The same people involved in the Communist movements with Castro and Che Guevara (in the 80s?) are opposing this.  The leftists oppose CAFTA because they don't want free enterprise and trade.

  Look back at history.  Look at the security of the US.  There was mass migration to the US from El Salvador and Nicaragua because of war.  If we don't pass CAFTA and stabilize the democracies, we will have more war in Central America.  We have to support CAFTA, support trade, and increase jobs to keep people there.

  If we don't, there will be war, there will be immigration, and against national security.

  by Power on Wed Jul 27, 2005 at 06:30:30 PM PDT

•  Burton

  gag invoking security.

  So it has nothing to do with the economy then.

  I thought so.

  by missliberties on Wed Jul 27, 2005 at 06:31:45 PM PDT

•  Rangel Rocks!

  secret information?
  Saddam Hussein?
  The Leftists?

  be careful what you say you  might have to go to a grand jury

  by missliberties on Wed Jul 27, 2005 at 06:34:20 PM PDT

•  AGAINST: Stephanie Tubbs-Jones, D-OH

  Rangel calls Burton so entertaining.  Expected Bin Laden and Hussein with Castro.  Suggests a search for WMD there.  Burton says the leftists are against it, and we need this to prevent war.  Rangel claims there is "secret information" and he may have to go for a grand jury.

  Tubbs-Jones - Lacks protections for workers in CAFTA countries, but here as well.  US lost 2.8 million jobs since January 2001, 200000 in Ohio.  Previous Congresses agreed with this.  Program helps workers who lose jobs due to international jobs, and gives training.

  There is nothing in CAFTA to assist American workers who lost their jobs.  Even Bill Thomas (R-CA), chair of Ways and Means, had his provision out.  Where is their protection?  NAFTA, CAFTA, SHAFTA.

  by Power on Wed Jul 27, 2005 at 06:35:09 PM PDT

•  FOR: Mike Oxley, R-OH

  He is of Sarbanes-Oxley.

  Great impart for financial services.  There is a unique opportunity to provide financial services to Central America. We would be foolhardy to ignore the two-way street.  We currently have a one-way street.  This will allow Americans to introduce products to this market.

  80% of Caribbean products are duty-free.  Our products are not.

  This is a huge opportunity for Ohio.  The idea is to improve the ability for exports to these countries.  Free trade in Australia, Chile, Morocco.  Why would we ignore Central America?

  by Power on Wed Jul 27, 2005 at 06:37:36 PM PDT

•  AGAINST: Earl Pomeroy (D-ND)

  Rangel I think said North Korea.

  Talks about the sugar beet farmers.  2-3 billion dollar economic impact, 30000 jobs in his region alone.  This allows sugar to pour in from CAFTA, with low wages and no environmental protections.  This is also a precedent for other sugar-producing countries.

  Some supporters claim we shouldn't have a sugar industry here, we should sacrifice it in the name of free trade.  We are at the deepest trade deficit in history.

  When are our jobs worth fighting for?  It should end tonight, we should stand for our constituents jobs.  Let's win one for the American people, vote no for CAFTA.

  More scattered applause.

  Rangel acknowledges the North Korea mistake.  Applause.

  by Power on Wed Jul 27, 2005 at 06:40:19 PM PDT

•  FOR: Jim Kolbe, R-AZ

  CAFTA is a "little" trade agreement, but it is a huge national security issue.  We can close the book on the 1980s.   Central America has been transformed from a totalitarian area to a region of peace.  This is more than a trade agreement, it is a statement of support for Democracy.

  The US will be confronted with political instability without this bill.  We will return to authoritarian regimes.

  Defeat of CAFTA supports Hugo Chavez.  He is meddling in Central America, and would love to pick up the pieces of a region shattered by a loss on CAFTA.  CAFTA will do bad things?  No.  It doesn't fix all problems, but it can only add jobs, and reduce immigration.  Let's turn this page and write a new chapter in partnership with Central America.

  by Power on Wed Jul 27, 2005 at 06:43:11 PM PDT

•  AGAINST: Sherrod Brown, R-OH

  Thanks for the people who have helped the anti-CAFTA case, bi-partisan.  Hundreds of staff on both sides.

  Crafted by a select few, for a select few.  More than 200000 Central Americans have protested.  Thousands of US groups have called on the administration to renegotiate the trade agreement.

  We want one that will pass on its merits.  Not on toothless sidedeals.

  They will twist arms until they break into 1000 pieces to win the vote.  They are buying votes.  This isn't partisan, crosses party and ideology.

  This is about exploiting cheap labor, not helping them.  It hurts us and does nothing for them.  When foreigners can buy US products our policies are succeeding.

  by Power on Wed Jul 27, 2005 at 06:46:37 PM PDT

  •  Brown is a Democrat

    by JamesB3 on Wed Jul 27, 2005 at 08:40:21 PM PDT

    •  Oops

      I knew that.  I must have made a typo.  I was typing straight for about 40 minutes with the summaries.

      by Power on Wed Jul 27, 2005 at 08:50:07 PM PDT

•  AGAINST Reps.

  From footage earlier I caught.

  Rep. Doris Matsui (D-CA), Steny Hoyer (D-MD), and Jim McGovern (D-MA), who was the leading the Dem. side, all voiced their concerns against CAFTA and extending the debate period from 2 hours for each side to a length similar to the eight hours granted to discussing NAFTA.

  by jorndorff on Wed Jul 27, 2005 at 06:49:18 PM PDT

•  Got To Go

  More speakers: Ileana Ros-Lehtinen, R-FL for, Hilda Solis, D-CA against.

  I think it's a shame that people aren't paying attention to this debate as much as they should.  This is an issue that I think could win a lot of elections for Democrats in 2006, but won't because we aren't using it.

  by Power on Wed Jul 27, 2005 at 06:52:50 PM PDT

  •  Thanks for covering

    ...more surely to come in the next few hours. I'll try to update this once or twice.

    It's not too late to make CAFTA an issue in '06. In southern states, especially, it's a big deal.

    Nancy Pelosi just spoke against CAFTA. Only caught the end of it.

    by jorndorff on Wed Jul 27, 2005 at 07:59:36 PM PDT

•  AGAINST Sam Farr

  Sam Farr (D-CA): 'what's the rush?'

  '3 of the 6 countries haven't even ratified it yet.'

  by jorndorff on Wed Jul 27, 2005 at 07:40:54 PM PDT

•  15 minute vote

  Just started at 11 pm eastern.

  by jorndorff on Wed Jul 27, 2005 at 08:01:57 PM PDT

  •  Halfway through

    It's 123 for, 101 against.

    by jorndorff on Wed Jul 27, 2005 at 08:09:44 PM PDT

•  Is there a list of which Dems

  voted for this? Time to run primary challengers. I doubt Ciro Rodriguez would've voted for this. If more had been done to help him in his primary fight last year, that would have been a deciding vote.

  by JamesB3 on Wed Jul 27, 2005 at 08:46:50 PM PDT

•  Ack!

  I can't stand it! It looks like it's gonna pass!
  Damn it was so fucking close!
  Damn Damn Damn

  I can't stand the smug look that will be on the Presidents face. 18 years and his armtwisting to pieces gets it because of fucking National Security.

  We have got to take this National Security crap into our own hands!

  Ack!

  Nancy Pelosi is cool.

  by missliberties on Wed Jul 27, 2005 at 08:47:42 PM PDT

  •  Still 9 votes to go

    8 Republicans and 1 Democrat who haven't voted yet. I guess DeLay is threatening them. The GOP only has a 4 vote yes margin, so if those 9 vote no that will be enough to kill it. Not likely, but we can hope.

    by JamesB3 on Wed Jul 27, 2005 at 08:54:50 PM PDT

    •  alright

      I will keep hope alive....

      this is what they did to the medicare bill.

      I guess Ton Delay still serves his purpose........hisssssssss

      by missliberties on Wed Jul 27, 2005 at 09:00:16 PM PDT

      •  I guess you were right

        It passed. By 2 votes.

        Once again we see why Democrats lose elections. What a joke.

        by JamesB3 on Wed Jul 27, 2005 at 09:08:37 PM PDT

        •  Boo hiss

          by missliberties on Wed Jul 27, 2005 at 09:10:45 PM PDT

•  Do we know who hasn't voted yet? n/t

  by MarCat on Wed Jul 27, 2005 at 08:52:00 PM PDT

•  2 more votes

  1 GOP "yes" vote and the last Dem (Marty Meehan of MA) voted "no". Who was the GOP vote? I think they voted yes.

  by JamesB3 on Wed Jul 27, 2005 at 09:02:14 PM PDT

•  jesus fucking christ

  Fucking loser dems lose again.  One heartbreaker after another.  CAFTA passes 217-215 with 16 fucking dem collaborators.  Damn them all to hell.

  Another vote bought late in the night.  RIP democracy.

  by pinche on Wed Jul 27, 2005 at 09:16:36 PM PDT