[Congressional Record Volume 151, Number 47 (Tuesday, April 19, 2005)]
[House]
[Pages H2109-H2110]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                                 CAFTA

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the order of the House of 
January 4, 2005, the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Brown) is recognized 
during morning hour debates for 5 minutes.
  Mr. BROWN of Ohio. Mr. Speaker, a bowling ball weighs about 170 times 
the weight of a slice of sandwich bread. It does not take a physicist 
to see the mismatch between a bowling ball and a slice of bread. It 
does not take a trade expert to see the economic mismatch between the 
United States and the nations that make up the Central American Free 
Trade Agreement, CAFTA: Honduras, Costa Rica, Nicaragua, Guatemala, and 
El Salvador.
  The way that proponents of the Central American Free Trade Agreement 
talk, one would think that Central America was one of the biggest 
economies in the Western Hemisphere. CAFTA nations, in fact, are not 
only among the world's poorest countries, they are among its smallest 
economies.
  Think about this: This big trade agreement that President Bush wants, 
CAFTA, the combined purchasing power of CAFTA nations is almost 
identical to the purchasing power of Columbus, Ohio.
  Tomorrow the House will hold a hearing on CAFTA. Since President Bush 
took office, Congress has voted within 55 days of the President's 
affixing his signature on a trade agreement. April 28, coming up, will 
mark the 11-month anniversary of when the President signed CAFTA. In 
other words, trade agreements are always sent to Congress quickly. 
Within a couple of months, we vote on them.
  The President has delayed CAFTA for 11 months because this simply is 
not an agreement that the American people want or need. As I said, 
other trade agreements were all done within about 2 months, but because 
CAFTA is so unpopular, because trade policy in this country is so 
wrong-headed, the President still has not asked this Congress to vote 
on CAFTA.
  Clearly, there is dissension in the ranks for good reason. CAFTA is 
the dysfunctional cousin of NAFTA, the North American Free Trade 
Agreement, and continues a legacy of failed trade policy.
  Look at NAFTA's record; NAFTA is the United States, Mexico, and 
Canada: One million U.S. manufacturing jobs lost to the North American 
Free Trade Agreement. Wages of Mexicans have stagnated. Environmental 
conditions, especially along the U.S.-Mexican border have worsened 
dramatically. And yet the U.S. continues to push for more of the same: 
more of the same job hemorrhaging, more of the same income-lowering 
trade agreements, more trade agreements that ship jobs overseas, more 
trade agreements that neglect environmental safety standards, more 
trade agreements that keep foreign workers in poverty, more trade 
agreements that undercut our food safety laws in our country. The only 
difference between CAFTA and NAFTA is the first letter.
  The definition of insanity is repeating the same action over and over 
and over again and expecting a different result. On trade we hear the 
same promises over and over and over again, and

[[Page H2110]]

we see the same results: lost jobs, a weakened economy, lower standards 
of living in Mexico, bad environmental outcomes. But this Congress 
somehow barely in the middle of the night continues to pass these trade 
agreements, and we see the same bad results.
  But do not take my word for it. Look at the numbers. The U.S. 
economy, with a $10 trillion GDP in 2002, is 170 times bigger than the 
economies of the CAFTA nations, at about $62 billion combined. It is 
like comparing a bowling ball that weighs 170 times a slice of bread.
  CAFTA is not about robust markets for the export of American goods. 
It is about outsourcing. It is about access to cheap labor. We send our 
jobs overseas. Workers overseas get paid almost nothing, not enabling 
them to raise their standard of living even a bit. U.S. corporations 
make more money. American workers lose their jobs. It is the same old 
story time and time again.
  Again, the combined purchasing power of the CAFTA nations is about 
that of Columbus, Ohio, or Orlando, Florida, or the entire State of 
Kansas. Trade pacts like NAFTA and CAFTA enable companies to exploit 
cheap labor in other countries in the developing world, then import 
their products back into the United States under favorable tariff 
terms.
  American companies outsource their jobs to Guatemala, outsource their 
jobs to China, outsource their jobs to Mexico. It costs American 
workers their jobs. It does almost nothing for workers in those 
countries. Yet profits at Wal-Mart and GM and so many other companies 
continue to rise.
  CAFTA will do nothing to stop the bleeding of manufacturing jobs 
except make it worse. It will do even less to create a strong Central 
American consumer market for American goods.
  Throughout the developing world, workers do not share in the wealth 
they create. Our decades of economic success in this country show that 
employees share in the wealth they create for their employer. If one 
works at GM, they help GM create wealth; they help GM make a profit. 
They get some of that money back. These trade agreements in the 
developing world simply do not work, and when the world's poorest 
people can buy American products rather than just make them, then we 
will know our trade agreements finally are working.
  Vote ``no'' on the Central American Free Trade Agreement.

                          ____________________