[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 151 (2005), Part 12]
[House]
[Page 16506]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




           KEEPING JOBS IN AMERICA BY VOTING ``NO'' ON CAFTA

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under a previous order of the House, the 
gentleman from Oregon (Mr. DeFazio) is recognized for 5 minutes.
  Mr. DeFAZIO. Mr. Speaker, as we approach the prospect of a vote on 
yet another free trade agreement, putting a stamp of approval 
potentially on the failures of U.S. trade policy and the $2 billion-a-
day deficit that we are running, Members should approach this vote with 
caution.
  First, they should be concerned about this bait-and-switch, the idea 
that we will before that vote have a vote to get tough with China, to 
begin to actually use our existing laws and authority to deal with the 
counterfeiting and the theft and the unfair trade practices of China.
  We do not need to pass a bill to do that. The administration should 
just do it. Use the laws. Use the trade agreements. They told us that 
is why they wanted China in the WTO, that they were going to enforce 
sanctions against China. They are not filing complaints against China 
under the existing laws.
  They do not need new authority; they just need to use their existing 
powers. So that is an attempt to give some cover to some of the weak-
kneed around here who want to stick with the President who is saying it 
is his highest priority to extend the failed trade policies of the 
United States to another five nations in Latin America.
  The President was, unfortunately, sadly in error last weekend when he 
went down to the south and said to the textile workers who have been 
devastated by these free trade policies that this would be good for 
them and the American economy.
  All the President has to do, and he probably has not had a chance to 
read it yet, but the United States International Trade Commission 
issued a report a year ago, 11 months ago, on CAFTA; and they said that 
in fact it is likely to have minimal impact on production, employment 
or prices in the United States. They went on to say that, yes, it would 
cause a tiny bump up in exports, but guess what? Like every other trade 
agreement the U.S. has ever entered into, it would be a much bigger 
bump up in imports.
  More lost jobs here at home will result from CAFTA. Do not be fooled. 
Think back to the predictions about the wonderful results that we were 
going to see from NAFTA and the fact that it was going to create 
400,000 jobs in the United States. It actually logs 800,000. They were 
off by 1.2 million jobs. CAFTA will have the same net result.
  We need a new trade policy, a trade policy that brings and keeps jobs 
that pay decent wages and provides benefits home here to the United 
States of America. We do not need to accelerate the race to the bottom. 
We do not need to ask the few remaining textile workers we have in this 
country to compete with people down in Central America who earn 50 
cents an hour. And then to say that those people who earn 50 cents an 
hour are going to provide a tremendous boon to the U.S. economy because 
they will be buying luxury SUVs made in America and all sorts of other 
products manufactured here on that 50 cent an hour salary is so absurd 
that it is hard to believe that any thinking Member will swallow that 
argument.
  If you just want to rubber-stamp, if you just want to follow the 
President and support the continued bipartisan failures of trade, Bill 
Clinton was a disaster on these issues, too, if you want to march down 
that path, then you can vote for CAFTA. But if you want to benefit the 
American people, manufacturing in the United States of America, our 
standard of living, our national security, if you want to see a 
turnaround in the $2 billion a day we are borrowing from the rest of 
the world to finance our overseas manufacturing, then you will vote 
``no'' on CAFTA, and a new day will dawn where we bring and keep jobs 
home to America.

                          ____________________