Anti-Free Trade Democrats Block Colombia Bill

April 11th, 2008 By: Michael van der Galien | Tags:

The Washington Post blasts Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi for blocking a bill that would make preferences on Colombian exports to the United States permanent and that would ‘give U.S. firms free access to Colombia for the first time, thus creating U.S. jobs.’

THE YEAR 2008 may enter history as the time when the Democratic Party lost its way on trade. Already, the party’s presidential candidates have engaged in an unseemly contest to adopt the most protectionist posture, suggesting that, if elected, they might pull out of the North American Free Trade Agreement. Yesterday, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi declared her intention to change the procedural rules governing the proposed trade promotion agreement with Colombia. President Bush submitted the pact to Congress on Tuesday for a vote within the next 90 legislative days, as required by the “fast-track” authority under which the U.S. negotiated the deal with Colombia. Ms. Pelosi says she’ll ask the House to undo that rule…

That political turf-staking, and the Democrats’ decreasingly credible claims of a death-squad campaign against Colombia’s trade unionists, constitutes all that’s left of the case against the agreement. Economically, it should be a no-brainer – especially at a time of rising U.S. joblessness. At the moment, Colombian exports to the United States already enjoy preferences. The trade agreement would make those permanent, but it would also give U.S. firms free access to Colombia for the first time, thus creating U.S. jobs. Politically, too, the agreement is in the American interest, as a reward to a friendly, democratic government that has made tremendous strides on human rights, despite harassment from Venezuela’s Hugo Chávez.

To be sure, President Bush provoked Ms. Pelosi. But he forced the issue only after months of inconclusive dickering convinced him that Democrats were determined to avoid a vote that would force them to accept accountability for opposing an agreement that is manifestly in America’s interest. It turns out his suspicions were correct.

The Wall Street Journal adds:

 The Democratic Party’s protectionist make-over was completed yesterday, when Nancy Pelosi decided to kill the Colombia free trade agreement. Her objections had nothing to do with the evidence and everything to do with politics, but this was an act of particular bad faith. It will damage the economic and security interests of the U.S. while trashing our best ally in Latin America…

The latest Democratic objection is that Bogotá isn’t doing enough to protect labor activists. But the murders of trade unionists have fallen by almost 80% since 2002, in part because of special protection programs, and Colombian President Álvaro Uribe has reduced other violence by nearly every measure, particularly against narco-traffickers. But any excuse will do. Yesterday Ms. Pelosi said the bill would harm “the economic concerns of America’s working families.” Yet over 90% of Colombian imports enter the U.S. duty-free, while the agreement would open the Colombian market to American goods that face tariffs as high as 35%.

Even if the free trade agreement is somehow removed from cold storage, Ms. Pelosi’s cheating is a first-order strategic blunder. Colombia is one of America’s closest friends in a hostile region menaced by Hugo Chávez’s Venezuela. For all the talk of repairing the U.S. “image” in the world, the Democrats don’t really mind harming that image if it pleases the AFL-CIO.

Although Democrats are usually more popular in other countries than Republicans, this anti-free trade attitude of leading Democrats may very well change that. The rest of the world knows that free trade with the US helps their economy, and they also know that free trade is beneficial for the US. The only reasons not to encourage free trade, then, are irrational (and xenophobic) views and fears.

Will this hurt Democrats domestically, and among Hispanic-American voters?

Share and Enjoy:
  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • Technorati
  • SphereIt
  • NewsVine
  • TailRank
  • Reddit
  • StumbleUpon
  1. C Stanley
    April 12th, 2008 at 13:56
    Reply | Quote | #1

    Hey, give the Dems a break. It’s not their fault that they’re forced to posture on protectionism because the voters in podunck towns cling to their fears and to anti-trade sentiment as a way of explaining their frustrations. LOL

  2. Jay_C
    April 24th, 2008 at 04:47
    Reply | Quote | #2

    Our country deserves a real debate on trade, not a debate where labeling one side protectionist is game, set and match.

PoliGazette Comments Policy

PoliGazette encourages comments from all viewpoints, especially those that disagree. Comments submitted must, however, adhere to the following standards. Comments that violate these standards may be edited or deleted without notice at the sole discretion of the editors. Commenters who repeatedly or egregiously violate these standards or who attempt to argue publicly with editors regarding the comments policy may be banned from commenting further.

(1) Comments should address the substantive content of the post. Comments that repeatedly or blatantly misrepresent the content of the post or of others' comments are not welcome. Comments that respond to something other than which the contributor or commenter may have said are irrelevant and should not be posted.

(2) Comments should avoid vulgarity as well as racial, ethnic, religious, or sexual bigotry.

(3) Comments should not personally attack the character, personal integrity, or professional reputation of any PoliGazette contributor or of other commenters.

(4) Comments should reflect the contributions of the commenters themselves and should not include extensive cut-and-paste reproductions of others' words except insofar as necessary to supplement the commenter's own arguments. Link spam, trackback spam, and propaganda spam will be instantly deleted.

(5) Public figures are considered open to all substantive criticism of their policies and statements. Comments that present objectively false factual information about public figures (i.e. "Obama is a Muslim") or that attack public figures by attacking their families are not welcome. Comments that merely repeat slogans for or against a candidate without engaging in substantive comment are not welcome.

Questions or challenges to these policies or their application should be directed to the editors by email only.


Warning: is_writable() [function.is-writable]: open_basedir restriction in effect. File(error_log) is not within the allowed path(s): (/home/p6525pol:/usr/lib/php:/usr/local/lib/php:/tmp) in /home/p6525pol/public_html/wp-includes/wp-db.php on line 500