In their own words: Why lawmakers

voted against fast track.

January, 2002: Publius

By Greg Rushford

Published in the Rushford Report

             On December 6 and after a bitter debate that reflected the U.S. political leadership’s ambivalence concerning free trade, the House of Representatives passed — by only one vote — legislation giving President George W. Bush so-called “fast-track” authority to negotiate liberalization measures with America’s trading partners. The bipartisan legislation was sponsored by Republican Bill Thomas ( Calif. ), and New Democrats Cal Dooley ( Calif. ), William Jefferson (LA), and John Tanner (TN).

            The Thomas-Dooley legislation begins with “findings” of Congress that basically reflect mainstream economics and politics since World War II: “The expansion of international trade is vital to the national security of the United States . Trade is critical to the economic growth and strength of the United States and to its leadership in the world. Stable trading relationships promote security and prosperity. Trade agreements today serve the same purposes that security pacts played during the Cold War, binding nations together through a series of mutual rights and obligations. Leadership by the United States in international trade fosters open markets, democracy, and peace throughout the world.”

            The difference in tone and substance with alternative legislation sponsored by Democrats Charles Rangel (NY), Sander Levin (MI), Robert Matsui (CA), and Jim McDermott (WA), is striking.

            Instead of an uplifting internationalist preamble, the Rangel-Levin bill basically puts America ’s trading partners on notice that their word is not to be trusted. The number one trade negotiating objective of the United States is “to obtain clear and specific commitments from trading partners of the United States to fulfill existing international trade obligations according to existing schedules.” The bill stresses the importance of ensuring “effective implementation of trade commitments and obligations by strengthening the effective operation of the rule of law by trading partners of the United States .”

            Rangel-Levin instructs the U.S. Trade Representative “to oppose any attempts to weaken in any respect the trade remedy laws of the United States,” and also “to ensure that the dispute settlement mechanisms in multilateral, regional, and bilateral agreements lead to prompt and full compliance.” The measure makes it clear that the goal is “to improve enforcement of decisions of dispute settlement panels to ensure prompt compliance by foreign governments with their obligations under the WTO.” The operative word is foreign. The U.S. steel lobby — which has a poor track record before WTO panels — does not think Uncle Sam should be compelled to bring its antidumping regime in line with WTO standards.

            Rangel-Levin-Matsui-McDermott could easily have been co-sponsored by America Firster Pat Buchanan, if he were in Congress. It trumpets a unilateralist world where Uncle Sam is the world’s trade policeman, assisted by the International Labor Organization, which would essentially police the labor laws of otherwise sovereign Third World countries. At the same time, the America Firsters do not want any international organization telling the United States what to do. It is very difficult to see how America could ever expect to exercise leadership in global economic circles with this attitude.

            I believe that it is a certainty that the WTO’s members would not have launched a new round of trade liberalizing negotiations in Doha late last year if U.S. Trade Representative Robert Zoellick would have stuck to such a rigid position, as had his predecessor Charlene Barshefsky in Seattle two years earlier.

            You don’t have to take my word for this. Just reflect upon the following excerpts of floor statements made by lawmakers who voted against fast track. Here is a view into the world of economic nationalism, and a world view dominated by fears of competition:                    

            “I have been a free trader for the last 23 years, since I have been in the United States Congress…The Uruguay Round, which passed 7 years ago, was basically about reducing tariffs and eliminating quotas…This next round, the round that we just witnesses in Doha, the beginning of, will be a round in which we not only talk about tariffs and quotas, which will be a small part of it, but it will be about antitrust laws. It will be about food safety laws. It will be about changes in hundreds of government regulations in the United States…The United States Trade Representative will be able to go through the back door, through the World Trade Organization, and make major changes in domestic regulations and domestic laws…We might find that there will be a situation, where basically we will be making major changes in antitrust laws, and we will not even know whether the consumer will be protected.”—-Robert Matsui (D-CA).

            “Americans are being asked to make three sacrifices in exchange for President Bush’s trade policy. They are being asked to give up their middle-class lifestyle, their environmental concerns, and their public health.”—-George Miller (D-CA).

            “Let us take a look at antidumping laws. We passed legislation in this body that said we would not weaken our antidumping and countervailing duty laws. Yet in Doha we put that on the table for negotiations.”—-Benjamin Cardin (D-MD).

            “Why pass another same-old same-old trade bill that will bring us more lost jobs, more bankrupt farmers with the lowest prices in history with growing trade deficits every single year?”—-Marcy Kaptur (D-OH).”

            Mr. Speaker, Congress has bailed out everybody, airlines, insurance companies, even car makers. Chrysler is now owned by Germans. Bailout for almost everyone except America ’s steel industry, which is dying. Since 1998, 25 American steel companies have filed for bankruptcy, with thousands and thousands of unemployed steelworkers losing their benefits, losing their health care, losing their families, losing their homes. Unbelievable. Meanwhile Daimler Chrysler is now lighting up cigars. Beam me up…Mr. Speaker, I yield back the fact that American cannot build smart bombs with Styrofoam; and we had better take a look at our domestic ability to produce steel for our national defense.”—-James A. Traficant, Jr. (D-OH).

            “The U.S. balance of trade in farm products has fallen 57 percent since 1996. Prices for major commodities have fallen nearly 50 percent. 72,000 family farms disappeared in the mid to late 1990s. U.S. farm income is projected to decline nine percent in the next year…Farmers should be wary of predictions that granting fast track will lead to new export markets. We’ve heard this all before, and farmers are falling further and further behind.”—-Peter DeFazio (D-OR).

            “If one is unemployed, unemployment is the biggest  problem. They cannot get health insurance today. They cannot support their families. I talk to unemployed workers every day. Their problems are right now, this week, today…What we have brought to the table and tried to get on the table is the question of whether or not labor laws, human rights laws, environmental laws, health and safety laws, should be just as much a part of trade negotiations as intellectual property laws and capital laws.” —-Richard Gephardt (D-MO).

            “Fast Track Trade Authority is actually a tool to aid powerful corporations searching the globe for cheap labor by ignoring basic workers’ rights, environmental safeguards, enforceable sanctions, and Congressional input.” —-Patsy Mink (D-Hawaii).

            “Instead of creating 1.6 million jobs over eight years, NAFTA has eliminated 766,000 jobs. In my home state of Illinois, over 37,000 people have lost their jobs as a result of NAFTA…Most of these jobs have been relocated to Mexico, where the labor and environmental standards are lower than in America…Even if American jobs were not relocated to Mexico and elsewhere, man companies have leveled this threat at their employees. Workers are told if they do not agree to the company’s terms, their jobs will go to Mexico . As a result, workers settle for contracts with lower wages and fewer benefits in collective bargaining. This occurred recently with the Tower Automotive plant in my congressional district.” —-Jerry Costello (D-Illinois).

            “I strongly support free trade, but it must be fair and not at the expense of American jobs, workers’ rights, the environment, or our Constitution…The Economic Policy Institute reports that Americans have lost 3 million actual and potential jobs since NAFTA. California alone has suffered over 300,000 jobs in trade-related losses.”—-Barbara Lee (D-Calif).

            “For instance, we have a particular problem in my State of Michigan with trash, garbage, coming in from Canada . Toronto has decided that it is much easier, more economical, less hassle, to bury all their waste in Wayne County, Michigan, which is the county the City of Detroit is located in. So they haul their garbage across the Ambassador Bridge , the Bluewater Bridge in my area up in Port Huron . We have a couple hundred trucks a day that comer across there with garbage, and God knows what is inside these facilities, and they take it to a dump, and they dump it there.”—-David Bonior (D-Mich).

            “This bill would make it more difficult for developing countries to make HIV-AIDS medicines available to people with AIDS. Twenty-five million people are living with AIDS in Africa . Our trade policy should not cost them their lives…This bill would also make it more difficult for the United States to respond to bioterrorist attacks. When the United States needed to acquire a large supply of the antibiotic Cipro to respond to the recent anthrax attacks, we knew that the health of the American people was more important than the profits of pharmaceutical companies. We had to get tough. The WTO could have ruled against us. Our trade policies should preserve our ability to respond to bioterrorist attacks in the future.”—-Maxine Waters (D-Calif).

            “Get this, they are trying to overturn ‘Buy America’ laws that require using American steel in highway projects.”—-Dennis Kucinich (D-OH).

            “We import millions of tons of food into this country. That is a lot of food, In 1993, 8 percent of imported fruits and vegetable were inspected. Since NAFTA, the number is now .7 percent. That is a .91 percent decrease in the inspections of fruits and vegetables that our children consume every day.”—-Betty McCollum (D-Minn).

TOP