[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 151 (2005), Part 10]
[House]
[Page 14381]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




                           RENEGOTIATE CAFTA

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under a previous order of the House, the 
gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Brown) is recognized for 5 minutes.
  Mr. BROWN of Ohio. Mr. Speaker, at a White House news conference 
earlier this month, President Bush called on Congress to pass CAFTA, 
the Central American Free Trade Agreement.
  Also earlier this month, the most powerful Republican in Congress, 
the gentleman from Texas (Mr. DeLay), promised a vote by July 4. 
Actually, it is the third time the gentleman has promised a vote on 
CAFTA. The first time in 2004 he said there would be a vote on the 
Central American Free Trade Agreement by the end of the year, December 
of 2004. Then earlier this year he promised a vote on CAFTA by Memorial 
Day, and now he is promising a vote by July 4.
  Where I come from, 3 strikes means you are out. As a result, Congress 
is waiting and waiting and waiting for the CAFTA vote count down to 
begin. While we wait, the many of us who have been speaking out against 
the Central American Free Trade Agreement have a message for the 
gentleman from Texas (Mr. DeLay) and for the President, and that is 
renegotiate the Central American Free Trade Agreement.
  President Bush signed CAFTA more than a year ago. Every trade 
agreement negotiated by this administration, Australia, Chile, 
Singapore, Morocco, every trade agreement negotiated by this 
administration was voted on by this Congress within 60 days of the 
President signing the agreement. CAFTA has languished in Congress for 
more than a year without a vote because this wrongheaded trade 
agreement offends Republicans and Democrats alike.
  It offends small manufacturers. It offends labor unions. It offends 
environmentalists and ranchers and small farmers and food safety 
advocates. It offends religious leaders in Central America and many 
religious leaders in this country.
  Most importantly, just look what has happened with trade policy in 
this country in the last 12 years. In 1992, the year I was elected to 
Congress, the United States had a $38 billion trade deficit. That means 
we imported $38 billion more than we exported. Today, a dozen years 
later, in 2004, last year, our trade deficit was $618 billion. From $38 
billion to $618 billion in only a dozen years. It is hard to argue that 
our trade policy is working.

                              {time}  2000

  Some people say, well, those are only just numbers, that is the trade 
deficit; who really cares? What that means is it means a significant 
loss in manufacturing jobs.
  The States in red are States that have lost 20 percent of their 
manufacturing. The State of Ohio, 216,000 just in the last 5 years; 
Michigan, 210,000 manufacturing jobs lost; Illinois, 224,000; 
Pennsylvania, 200,000; Mississippi and Alabama combined, 130,000. In 
the gentleman from Georgia's (Mr. Lewis) home State, they have lost 
between 15 and 20 percent.
  These are the States in blue, 107,000. In the gentlewoman from 
California's (Ms. Watson) and the gentleman from California's (Mr. 
Berman) State, 354,000 jobs lost.
  In State after State after State we have seen hundreds of thousands 
of manufacturing jobs lost in the last 5 years, not entirely because of 
but in large part because of failed trade policies. Each one of these 
jobs translates into the loss of a bread winner, translates into less 
money for education in the community, less money for police and fire as 
the tax base shrinks with more and more industrial concerns shutting 
down.
  These are faces of real people, what these numbers represent, and it 
is hurting an awful lot of families in every one of these States and 
our country.
  As we see, the Central American Free Trade Agreement was negotiated 
by a select few for a select few. It was negotiated by the U.S. 
pharmaceutical industry to help the U.S. pharmaceutical industry. It 
was negotiated by big energy companies in the United States to help big 
energy companies in the United States. It was negotiated by insurance 
and financial institutions to help insurance and financial 
institutions. But it is not helping workers. It is not helping the 
environment. It is not helping small manufacturers. It is not helping 
small farmers and small ranchers in our country.
  It is the same old story, Mr. Speaker. Every time there is a trade 
agreement, the President makes three promises. He promises there will 
be more jobs in the U.S., more manufacturing products that are exported 
to other countries, and it means better wages and a higher standard of 
living for workers in the developing country. Yet, with every single 
trade agreement, their promises fall by the wayside.
  Benjamin Franklin said, the definition of insanity is doing the same 
thing over and over and over and expecting a different result. The 
President makes the same promises about NAFTA, about PNTR with China, 
about CAFTA, about every trade agreement over and over and over, and 
the results are the same: more manufacturing job loss; more stagnation 
of wages in the developing world where their standard of living does 
not go up; more plant shutdowns in community after community in our 
country.
  In the face of overwhelming bipartisan opposition, the administration 
and the gentleman from Texas (Mr. DeLay), the most powerful Republican 
in the House, have tried every trick in the book to pass this CAFTA. 
Mr. Speaker, CAFTA is a bad idea. Overwhelming opposition to this 
agreement says we should renegotiate the Central American Free Trade 
Agreement.

                          ____________________