Related Articles

CAFTA:
Another Bad Deal

I was proud when I read that Congresswoman Linda Sanchez, a California IBEW member, stood up on the floor of the U.S. House to challenge the Central American Free Trade Agreement (CAFTA). She told her colleagues not to be fooled like some were when they supported the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA).

If you ever wonder whether it makes a difference when we elect members to public office or, for that matter, write letters and march in the streets, look no further.

Ten tough years have passed since NAFTA, the trade agreement that was supposed to open up markets for U.S. firms and also raise the standard of living in Mexico.

Over 879,000 U.S. jobs, including well-paying IBEW jobs, have been lost. Some plants moved to Mexico—stayed awhile—then left for China and other parts of Asia. The wages of workers in Mexico have declined and their communities have been spoiled by industrial toxins.

Now for the good news; some in Congress, including Democrats who supported other trade deals, are heeding Congresswoman Sanchez’s warning.

Representative Ellen Tauscher, D-Cal., chairwoman of the House New Democrat Coalition, said, "We cannot abide trade deals that lower worker protections or reduce the ability to enforce fundamental labor standards. Unfortunately, CAFTA fails this test."

Political leaders don’t change positions without cause. Remember the thousands of protestors who took to the streets of Seattle in 1999, during the World Trade Organization’s meeting? Remember the front cover of the Journal showing President Hill marching in Miami in 2003 against the Free Trade Agreement of the Americas? Labor and our allies woke up our nation—including members of Congress—to the need for fairness and sanity in our trade agreements. We intensified the debate during the Presidential campaign of 2004.

While the administration tries to twist arms to vote for CAFTA, it’s more important than ever to keep them from twisting the truth about who wins and who loses.

Manufacturing workers usually don’t need much convincing to oppose a bad trade deal. The threat for workers in our other branches may seem more remote, but the die has been cast.

CAFTA’s language on government procurement covers virtually all government agencies and 21 state governments. The day could come when prevailing wage laws and project labor agreements on construction projects end up being abolished by a panel of CAFTA trade arbitrators that has legal power greater than federal and state governments.

Small farmers on both sides of this trade deal want to increase their markets. Under CAFTA, however, some U.S. farmers would be driven out of business by cheap Central American imported sugar and other products. Thousands of Central American farmers will be driven off the land as big U.S. agribusiness floods their markets. They will migrate north.

President Bush has spoken with passion about the need to stem the spread of AIDS and other infectious diseases. If CAFTA passes, however, over 275,000 AIDS sufferers in nations covered by the agreement could lose the inexpensive generic drugs that are keeping them alive. That’s because the pact would give a five-year edge to U.S. pharmaceutical companies against low-cost competitors.

Central America is one of the most biologically diverse areas of the world, containing thousands of species of plants and animals. Under CAFTA, laws protecting the environment could be gutted. It wouldn’t be long before the effects would be felt on the climate farther north.

I believe that most Americans have a problem with setting aside our public morality and good sense for trade deals that benefit only a few wealthy corporations.

There is an answer here. Let’s defeat CAFTA and make sure that future trade agreements square with the ideals that our nation was founded upon.

  Secretary-
Treasurer’s
Message