Any Congress member who tells you he or she is in favor of restricting immigration and securing our borders but then votes to expand "free trade" and put foreign corporations in charge of our ports is either a fool or a liar. But they sure seem to think voters are fools.
Even as they set up hearings around the country to whip up anti-immigrant feelings, House Republicans on July 20 narrowly approved a "free trade" deal with Oman 221-205 in a largely party-line vote. All but 28 of 232 Republicans voted against the deal, while only 22 out of 202 Dems supported it.
The deal was similar to the Central America Free Trade Agreement, which passed 217-215 on on July 27, 2005 after a night of arm-twisting by House GOP leaders. CAFTA, which would expand the North American Free Trade Agreement to Central America and the Dominican Republic, was opposed by all but 15 House Democrats.
Lori Wallach of Public Citizen's Global Trade Watch noted that labor provisions in the Oman deal are identical to CAFTA -- only requiring that Oman, a sultanate on the southeast coast of the Arabian Peninsula, enforce its existing labor laws, which are "exceptionally bad -- considerably worse than Central American laws, with independent unions explicitly forbidden." The State Department's most recent report cites Oman for forced labor and human trafficking, among other human rights violations.
But the Oman deal goes even further than NAFTA and CAFTA in giving foreign investers the right to challenge many US government decisions about federal contracts, leases or concession agreements affecting a covered foreign invester.
US trade negotiators inserted language in the deal that would grant any company incorporated in Oman the right to acquire and operate port facilities in the US. Rep. John Murtha, D-Pa., noted that it would allow companies to "drag the US before a UN or World Bank tribunal" to demand compensation if Washington blocked it from acquiring and operating US ports, as Dubai Ports World, based in the United Arab Emirates, was forced to abandon its planned purchase of terminal operation rights at major US ports earlier this year because of security concerns.
Once again the Bush administration and GOP leaders of Congress, along with some centrist Dems, have put the profits of multinational corporations ahead of the well-being of US workers, home-grown industry and national security.
In July, talks to expand the World Trade Organization in Doha, capital of the Persian Gulf emirate of Qatar, collapsed in the face of growing opposition in poor and rich countries alike. In the past decade, the number and percentage of people living on less than $1 a day has increased in the world's poorest regions. Household income for US families has stagnated, while the US trade debt has grown from $95 billion in 1993 to $717 billion in 2005, threatening global economic stability. The US agriculture trade surplus also virtually disappeared and, yes, hundreds of thousands of Mexican and Central American workers came north seeking jobs to support their families.
The United States should lead the world back to the drawing board to create a trading system that will improve the lives of workers and farmers and protect the environment around the world. A fair trade system can be devised, but multinational corporations cannot call all the shots, as they have so far.
From The Progressive Populist, http://www.populist.com