[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 151 (2005), Part 5]
[House]
[Pages 6945-6946]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




                     OPPOSITION TO TRADE AGREEMENTS

  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, the definition of insanity is when 
someone does the same thing over and over and over again, and then 
expects a different outcome.
  Every time a trade agreement comes in front of this Congress, the 
American Free Trade Agreement in 1993, the trade agreements throughout 
the 1990s, trade with China, trade agreement after trade agreement, the 
support of those trade agreements promise the American people several 
things.
  They promise more jobs for Americans, they promise more U.S. exports 
to those countries with whom the trade agreement is signed. They 
promise strengthening the middle class in the United States. They 
promise more manufacturing jobs for Americans. They promise a 
prosperity in the developing countries whom we are trading with. They 
promise strong environmental standards and food safety standards and 
worker standards and all of that.
  Every time they make those promises, this Congress passes a trade 
agreement, usually in the middle of the night, usually by a handful of 
votes, and every time after this Congress passes these trade 
agreements, the promises just evaporate. We simply do not see the kind 
of results they promise.
  One of the promises they make in every single trade agreement is that 
our trade deficit would come down. And let me point out our trade 
deficit, what has happened in this country.
  Our trade deficit is a simple calculation: It is how much the United 
States exports versus how much it imports. If we export more than we 
import, we have a trade surplus. If we buy, import, more than we sell, 
export, we then have a trade deficit.
  I ran for Congress in 1992. In 1992 the trade deficit in this country 
was $38 billion. Since 1992 we have seen a series of trade agreements 
passed, NAFTA, China, Australia, Morocco, Singapore, Chile, several 
others.
  Today, the trade deficit, $38 billion in 1992, the trade deficit last 
year 2004, was $620 billion. From 38 billion to 620 billion, yet the 
people that brought us NAFTA, the people that brought us China, Most 
Favored Nation status, are still saying, Vote for our trade agreements 
and we will bring deficits down.
  But do not take my word for it when I say that they break these 
promises. Look at these trade deficit numbers, and then look at what 
President Bush wants to do today.
  President Bush is saying, Please pass the Central American Free Trade 
Agreement, similar to the North American Free Trade Agreement, CAFTA, 
the Central American Free Trade Agreement. He says, If you pass CAFTA, 
we will have more exports; we will grow manufacturing in the United 
States; we will have a strengthened middle class; we will have strong 
environmental standards both in the United States and Central America; 
it will bring prosperity to the Central American countries.
  What he does not tell you is that the six Central American countries 
that make up CAFTA, their combined economies figure at about $62 
billion. Our economy generates $10.5 trillion in GDP, the six countries 
in Central America have a combined GDP, if you will, of $62 billion.
  So CAFTA is not about robust markets for the exporting of American 
goods. They simply are not able to buy our products. $62 billion GDP in 
those six countries, that is about the combined purchasing power of the 
city of Orlando, Florida, or the city of Columbus, Ohio, or the entire 
State of Kansas. In other words, these six very small, very poor 
countries, have the economic input of Kansas or of Columbus or of 
Orlando.
  So they are not buying American products. So they simply cannot buy 
agricultural produce from this country. They cannot buy the wines from 
California or the cars from Ohio or the steel production from West 
Virginia. They cannot buy computer goods. They simply cannot afford to 
buy these products from the United States.
  So what are these trade agreements about? What was NAFTA about? What 
was the China trade agreement, MFN, about, what was CAFTA, the Central 
American Free Trade Agreement that the President wants us to pass, what 
is that about? It is about outsourcing jobs. It is about moving 
production from the United States where workers make $8 or $10 or $15 
or $20 an hour producing things, to Guatemala, to Honduras, to Costa 
Rica, to Nicaragua, to El Salvador, to countries where the wages are 
maybe a dollar or two a day, or $3 or $4 a day in some cases.
  It is about outsourcing jobs. It is about moving production to 
Central America. It is about loss of American jobs. It is about 
exploitation of workers in the developing countries. It is about worse 
environmental regulations. It is about weaker food safety standards. 
But it is also about profits, the profits for large American companies.
  That is why in this hall you are seeing the largest CEOs of the 
largest companies walk the halls asking Members of Congress to vote for 
CAFTA. You are seeing the CEOs of America's largest companies 
contributing to elected officials, to Members of Congress. You are 
seeing them trying to buy their way into this institution, this corrupt 
institution, under the leadership of Republican leader Tom DeLay.
  You are seeing in this institution an attempt to buy the Central 
American Free Trade Agreement. This agreement is about profits for 
American companies. It is about campaign contributions. But what CAFTA 
will not do is stop the bleeding of manufacturing jobs in the United 
States, and what it will not do is create a strong Central American 
consumer market for American goods.
  Our economic success in this country is that workers in our country 
share in

[[Page 6946]]

the wealth we create. If you work for General Motors, you help that 
company produce profits, you help that company do well. As a result, 
you, as a worker, share in the profits that you create.
  That is what has made our economy vibrant. It is that people who work 
hard and play by the rules do well. But throughout the developing 
world, workers do not share in the wealth they create. So what will 
make a trade agreement work is when the world's poorest people can buy 
American products rather than just make them; then we will know that 
our trade policy finally will have succeeded.

                          ____________________