[Congressional Record Volume 151, Number 48 (Wednesday, April 20, 2005)]
[House]
[Pages H2381-H2382]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
DO NOT SUPPORT CAFTA
The SPEAKER pro tempore (Ms. Foxx). Under a previous order of the
House, the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Brown) is recognized for 5 minutes.
Mr. BROWN of Ohio. Madam Speaker, earlier today, nearly two dozen
House and Senate Members, a large number of Members of both parties,
held a news conference with about 175 to 200 people representing a
whole host of organizations in opposition to the Central American Free
Trade Agreement.
Those groups were as diverse as textile manufacturers, as sugar
farmers, as environmentalists, labor organizations, religious groups,
all kinds of groups, all kinds of organizations, all kinds of
individuals in opposition to the Central American Free Trade Agreement.
Madam Speaker, sometime in the next 6 weeks, this legislation, the
Central American Free Trade Agreement, will come to the House floor for
a vote, according to Republican majority leader, the gentleman from
Texas (Mr. DeLay), and the chairman of the Ways and Means Committee,
the gentleman from California (Mr. Thomas.)
The supporters of the Central American Free Trade Agreement have told
Members of Congress, have told the public, have told newspapers that
the Central American Free Trade Agreement will create jobs for
Americans, it will create more opportunities to manufacture goods and
export them to Central America, it will help farmers and small
businesses and manufacturers and consumers and all kinds of groups and
people in our country.
The problem is that is the exact same thing that supporters of the
North American Free Trade Agreement told us a dozen years ago. It is
the exact same promise that sponsors of entry into the World Trade
Organization told us about 10 years ago; it is the same promise that
they told us when we considered the China PNTR, Permanent Normal Trade
Relations, most favored nation status for China; this is the same
promise they made on a half dozen other trade agreements.
Yet, in every case, after every trade agreement, we lost more
manufacturing jobs, we saw our environmental and food safety standards
weakened, we saw less prosperity within those countries with whom we
traded, whether it was Mexico, whether it was China, whether it was
country after country after country.
Wages continued to stagnate in those countries, and wages continue to
stagnant in our country. People actually earn less in real dollars
today than they did a year ago before the last trade agreement. On
issue after issue they continue to make these promises, and they
generally failed to live up to these promises.
Madam Speaker, I would call your attention to this chart. The year I
ran for Congress in 1992, the United States had a trade deficit of $38
billion, $38 billion in 1992, 13 years ago. You can see how this trade
deficit got bigger and bigger and bigger.
Today our trade deficit, through the year 2004, our trade deficit was
$618 billion. It went from $38 billion just about a dozen years later
$618 approximately.
[[Page H2382]]
That means more Americans, more American jobs are exported, more
American job losses, and that is bad news not just for manufacturing
and the people that own those companies; it is bad news for American
workers, it is bad news for our communities, it is bad news for our
schools and our families.
And if we really want to talk about American values, then we ought to
be talking about what these trade agreements do to our children, do to
our families, what they do to the school systems, what they do to
police and fire protection, school districts, police districts and fire
districts; and cities lose more and more tax revenue.
The fact is the promises of the Central American Free Trade Agreement
are again the same as they were under NAFTA, the same as they were
under China trade, the same as they were under the legislation setting
up the World Trade Organization. But what we see time and time again is
more trade deficit, more hemorrhaging of American jobs.
Now, when they talk about CAFTA, the six countries in Central America
that this trade agreement involves with the United States under that,
the entire economies of these six countries are equal to the economy of
Columbus, Ohio or the State of Kansas, or Orlando, Florida. Their
buying power is such in those countries, those six countries, as poor
as they are, and as small as they are, they simply do not have the
buying power to buy American products. Guatemalans and Nicaraguans and
the people in Honduras and Costa Rica and El Salvador simply do not
have the money to buy cars manufactured in Ohio, or steel made in West
Virginia. They do not have the purchasing power to buy textiles and
apparel from Georgia, South Carolina, from North Carolina.
They do not have the money or the purchasing power or the income to
buy software from Seattle or high-tech products from California. Madam
Speaker, what this trade agreement is about is what all of these trade
agreements are about: they are about cheap labor, no environmental
regulation, weak worker safety laws. We need to vote ``no'' on the
Central American Free Trade Agreement.
____________________