Pass the Colombia trade pact
By Senator Kay Bailey Hutchison Posted in Columbia | Foreign Affairs | Free Trade | Texas — Comments (27) / Email this page » / Leave a comment »
President Reagan once observed, "The way to prosperity for all nations is rejecting protectionist legislation and promoting fair and free competition."
On April 10, the U.S. House speaker indefinitely blocked a vote on the pending Colombia Free Trade Agreement. The action by the Democrats sends the wrong message to trade partners around the world and squanders an opportunity to help Americans shouldering the burden of unemployment and a stalling economy.
Indeed, failure to ratify the trade agreement with Colombia denies economic growth opportunities for both the United States and Colombia, stifles competition and undermines efforts to create a safer, more stable world.
Economically, enactment of the agreement would level the playing field and foster fair trade by removing the costly tariffs levied on U.S. exporters trying to sell their goods in Colombian markets. The U.S. International Trade Commission projects that the deal would increase U.S. exports to Colombia by $1.1 billion a year, which in turn will create jobs for American workers.
In 2007, America exported high-quality beef, cotton, wheat, soybeans, fruits, vegetables and other goods to Colombia, with sales valued at $8.6 billion.
Although Colombia was able to export goods into the U.S. duty-free, American businesses and producers are still obligated to pay tariffs on exports to Colombia. The U.S. trade representative estimates that, since negotiations on the trade pact were completed in 2006, American products have been taxed nearly $1 billion in tariffs paid to Colombia. By eliminating this inequity, producers in the U.S. will have greater access to this lucrative market.
This would particularly benefit Texas, which led the nation in merchandise exports to Colombia last year, resulting in $2.3 billion in revenue for the state.
Read on . . .
Nearly 21,000 companies export goods from locations in Texas. The vast majority are small and medium-sized businesses. Without costly tariffs, Texas businesses could bring more of their goods to more customers in Colombia.
The trade agreement would also ease regulatory practices associated with trade and would benefit many small Texas businesses that don't have the resources to negotiate the customs process.
More broadly, with the U.S. economy declining, Americans are consuming domestic goods at a slower pace. Expanding U.S. exports to international markets can help offset a downturn in domestic consumption.
The economic growth that trade can stimulate is part of a larger imperative: global leadership.
If Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., successfully subverts the Colombia agreement, our nation could move toward an isolationist posture that is shortsighted and imprudent in a global economy.
China, Russia and India are surging into the marketplace and dominating key sectors like manufacturing, technology and services. Though American manufactures are matchless in quality, without preferential trade agreements our access to world markets is inhibited, and we jeopardize our competitive edge. Such pacts between our competitors in Europe, Asia and Latin America are rapidly outpacing and outnumbering U.S. trade deals.
How can we lead if we limit participation?
Nations like Colombia (which has made great strides under President Alvaro Uribe) are looking to the U.S. as an example of democratic governance and economic freedom.
Fostering stable democracies through trade relationships in Latin America and other regions of the world is in our nation's best interests. But by stalling the deal, we risk sending Colombia -- and future trade partners -- the message that parochial politics supersedes policy.
It is reckless to imperil a partnership with Colombia when neighboring Venezuela is led by a dangerous dictator who threatens freedom in all of Latin America. We will need strong allies, like Uribe, to stand up against Hugo Chavez's political abuse of Venezuelan oil and the terrorism he levies against our hemisphere.
The United States has an opportunity to bolster our economy, reaffirm our position as a global leader and build the diplomatic relationships that will help keep us safe. The time to move forward and ratify the Colombia free-trade agreement is now. Congress' failure to consider the pact cannot be justified.
Pass the Colombia trade pact 27 Comments (0 topical, 27 editorial, 0 hidden) Post a comment »
We just watch our manufacturing dying and jobs moving overseas. Who is it who has no clue?
Go read some of Pejman's articles on free trade. Stop blaming free trade for job loss when it is just as easy to point to 10 other reasons why manufacturing jobs have been lost.
Now also found at The Minority Report
BEIJING (Reuters) - Thousands of children in southwest China have been sold into slavery like "cabbages", to work as labourers in more prosperous areas such as the booming southern province of Guangdong, a newspaper said on Tuesday.
China announced a nationwide crackdown on slavery and child labor last year after reports that hundreds of poor farmers, children and mentally disabled were forced to work in kilns and mines in Shanxi province and neighboring Henan.
"The bustling child labor market (in Sichuan province) was set up by the local chief foreman and his gang of 18 minor foremen, who each manage 50 to 100 child labourers," the Southern Metropolis Newspaper said.
"The children generally fall between the ages of 13 and 15, but many look under 10," it added.
So, our workers are supposed to compete against this in the name of "free trade"....... Whatever happened to a level playing field? Or is the goal of "globalization" so important that its ok to sell the USA short?
And the relevance of this to Columbia is?BEIJING (Reuters)
if we were to set up trade barriers, this wouldn't happen, is that what you are saying?
Besides being beneficial to America, the effects of free trade on other nations is overwhelmingly beneficial. Here is just one article demonstrating that:
Is there any way the children discussed in the article are actually creating products that are also created by American workers?
bring out protectionist arguments. They are certainly appeals to strong emotional arguments, but usually devoid of facts.
Socialism doesn't work. It looks nice on paper, but it's been tried and it's failed miserably every time (usually accompanied by widespread death and suffering).
Proud member of the V.R.W.C.
This is a win/win deal. We have to beat back the protectionists and get this deal passed.
Now also found at The Minority Report
believe free trade makes us a better country. with regards to manufacturing jobs it is not like people were not told in the 80's that those jobs would go away with innovation and would not be coming back. I think for the Democrats to lie and pander to people and give them false "hope" that they are coming back is beyond reprehensible.
I like what Senator McCain is saying to those small towns that were hit hard by innovation in that he suggest training for new more high tech jobs. I hope to see you all work towards something substantial on that front.
Freedom of Religion not Freedom from Religion
I'm in 100% agreement on the Columbia trade thing, and very glad you came by.
I'm part of the hefty contingent of Texans here at RS. Once upon a time I was part of the contingent of hefty Texans at RS - but diet and exercise have done me good....
Drop by anytime!
Kill the terrorists
Protect the borders
Punch the hippies -- Frank J
What principles are you moderate on?
The GOP and their business allies seem interested in exporting jobs more often than products.
Can't say I'm anything more than ambilant over this one.
When CEOs start thinking America first when it comes to jobs, I may buy back into "free trade."
Here's a graphic of unemployment over the past few decades. As the country has embraced free trade, unemployment rates have plummeted.
Yes, free trade also changes what jobs it is most profitable for Americans to do. It does mean more service jobs and less manufacturing jobs. But nursing, computer-related jobs, and other health service jobs have more than made up for "lost" manufacturing jobs.
Of course, some people have "lost" in this trade. But the nation overall has grown faster, kept more people employed, and become richer because of free trade.
Put otherwise, unfree trade is the government preventing people from making the best choices for themselves and represents government-enforced unemployment and poverty for some Americans.
______________________________________
Donate to the Rs in Close Senate Races through Slatecard
There is no doubt that free trade does result in some dislocations. In a dynmamic economy, jobs are created and destroyed more frequently than in a stagnant economy.
There is no doubt that those with relatively few skills incur a disproportionate amount of the disadvantages to free trade and those with skills are better suited to enjoy the benefits.
However, everyone benefits from the low prices. When it comes the more basic staples, such as food, lodging, clothes---the poor benefit proportionately more than the rich because poorer people spend a greater percentage of their income on the basic staples of life.
You should also remember that some jobs are lost due to protectionism.
The bottom line is that free trade with those outside the country has similar benefits to free trade within the country. You create larger markets which can take advantage of economies of scale and reward innovation.
The alternative to free trade is a US in decline. The Soviet Union was screwed up for many reasons. However, they were further behind in terms of economics in the year 1985 than they were in the year 1955. One of the reasons for that is trade (the lack thereof) and competitive pressure (the lack thereof).
I realize that many people are anti-communist without be pro-free trade. However, the market mechanism is the market mechanism--whether internal or not.
Free trade, as we currently practice it, is economic socialism on a global scale. But...but...George W. Bush's chief economic advisor stated that exporting jobs is good for America. Yeah, THAT makes a lot of sense. We can and should negotiate fair and sensible and lucrative trade deals. We can do that without placing our heads on the guillotine.
Also, it looks like we're not alone in our lack of adoration for free trade:
http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/content/08_06/b4070032762393.htm
http://online.wsj.com/public/article/SB119144942897748150.html
To protect 20,000 or so steel industry jobs, the government implemented steel tarrifs that negatively impacted 300,000 auto industry jobs. Free trade allows certain jobs to stay here that would otherwise leave (such as the Caterpillar jobs that will leave if the Columbia deal is not executed).
Free trade works for society overall, but it can definitely hurt individual workers---especially those who do not take personal responsibility for their careers.
...for themselves if free trade (as it is being practiced now) is helping them or hurting them. According to the Fortune, the people have spoken. Even 2/3 of Republicans aren't buying it.
I agree with the BW article: Free trade primarily benefits a small sliver of folks (probably the 1/3 of the minority party who still supports it). The others aren't feeling the love, though. Maybe unemployment is still (relatively) low, but McJobs aren't exactly prosperous. Wages are stagnant and actual purchasing power is declining. Sorry, but "no sale".
The sad part is that all free trade deals are not created equally. Some are better than others. The free trade "brand", though now has been badly tarnished and people often feel like they're being sold a bill of goods, so the immediate reaction to pleas of more free trade is usually negative.
I know I'm in the lion's den here, but I'm (generally) a liberal who is also a "liberal" in the economic sense, so I support free trade.
Demand for labor rises and falls due to many different factors, not just the comparative advantages that go along with free trade. That goes with capitalism. While tariffs might create or help maintain demand for a particular domestic good or service , in the long run, we are all worse off. Steel is a great example of this. Farming subsidies should go too.
Haha, you're in danger of falling into our trap.
First, free trade.
Then free markets entirely.
Next, lower capital gains taxes.
Then (gasp) lower taxes on everybody.
It just goes downhill from there.....
Before you know it, you're in favor of lower regulation, originalist judges, law and order, strong national defense, drilling in ANWR, photo ID's at voting places, and a border fence.
Resistence is futile. We will assimilate you. You will service.....us. (hey, that's how the Borg said it)
Kill the terrorists
Protect the borders
Punch the hippies -- Frank J
Socialism doesn't work. It looks nice on paper, but it's been tried and it's failed miserably every time (usually accompanied by widespread death and suffering).
Proud member of the V.R.W.C.
conceived of by man.
$8.6 billion dollars in trade is nothing to sneeze at, and also,
you make a point about Chavez.
Thanks for dropping by!
Free trade is a Win/Win game, but you have to keep fighting the protectionists who have no clue.
Socialism doesn't work. It looks nice on paper, but it's been tried and it's failed miserably every time (usually accompanied by widespread death and suffering).
Proud member of the V.R.W.C.