[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 151 (2005), Part 6]
[House]
[Pages 7827-7828]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




            NO TO THE CENTRAL AMERICAN FREE TRADE AGREEMENT

  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, last week more than 150 Republicans 
and Democrats, Senators and House Members, business groups and labor 
organizations gathered on Capitol Hill to speak out against the Central 
American Free Trade Agreement. This group of unlikely bedfellows, if 
you will, spoke with one voice to deliver a unified message, no to 
CAFTA.
  CAFTA, the Central American Free Trade Agreement, expands the failed 
trade policies of the North American Free Trade Agreement to Central 
America. When I ran for Congress in 1992, the United States had a $38 
billion trade deficit. Last year, a dozen years later, the United 
States had a $618 billion trade deficit: from $38 billion to $618 
billion trade deficit.
  The more you look at the face of CAFTA, the better you can see who 
will benefit and who will pay the price if Congress passes one more 
trade

[[Page 7828]]

agreement. Trade pacts like NAFTA and CAFTA enable companies to go 
overseas, exploit cheap labor in the developing world, and then import 
their products back into the United States. That is why we have a $618 
billion trade deficit.
  The Central American Free Trade Agreement should actually be called 
the Central American Free Labor Agreement.
  Now, we know in the United States our economy over the last several 
decades has been a tremendous success because workers share in the 
wealth they create. If you work for General Motors, if you work for a 
hardware store, you help your employer by your labor make money, and 
your employer in turn allows you to share in the wealth you create. 
That is why the American economy is such a success story.
  But throughout the developing world, workers simply do not share in 
the wealth they create. Workers in Costa Rica cannot afford to buy the 
toys they make for Disney for their children. Workers in Vietnam at a 
Nike plant cannot afford to buy the shoes they make. Motorola workers 
in Malaysia cannot afford to buy the cell phones they make. Ford and GM 
workers in Mexico cannot afford to buy the cars they manufacture.
  The Central American Free Labor Agreement is about access to cheap 
labor. The numbers do not lie. The combined purchasing power of the 
CAFTA nations, Costa Rica, Nicaragua, El Salvador, Guatemala and 
Honduras, the combined purchasing power of those six countries is equal 
to that of Columbus, Ohio, or Orlando, Florida, or Memphis, Tennessee, 
or the entire State of Kansas.
  CAFTA supporters attempt to argue that this trade agreement will open 
markets for U.S. exports. They paint a picture of American workers 
manufacturing products for this hugely growing consumer market in 
Central America. But the math does not lie. The average salary of a 
Nicaraguan worker is $2,300 a year, $191 a month. Nicaraguan workers 
cannot afford to buy a car made in Ohio. They cannot afford to buy 
shoes made in Maine. They cannot afford to buy textiles or apparel made 
in North Carolina or Georgia. They cannot afford to buy software made 
in Seattle in the district of the gentleman from Washington (Mr. 
McDermott).
  The fact is, I ask CAFTA supporters, what American-made product can a 
Central American worker purchase who is earning less than $200 a month? 
CAFTA supporters will not answer these questions. They cannot.
  The truth is that CAFTA is not about selling them American products. 
CAFTA is about exploiting foreign workers, about taking American jobs 
to Central America. It is about exploiting those foreign workers, and 
it means fewer jobs here.
  NAFTA promised job growth in the U.S. and a thriving middle class in 
Mexico; but 10 years later our Nation has lost 1 million jobs, and 
Mexican workers' wages have remained stagnant.
  CAFTA, the dysfunctional cousin of NAFTA, is more of the same: 
another trade agreement that ships jobs overseas, another trade 
agreement that neglects the essential environmental standards, another 
trade agreement that weakens food safety standards in both countries, 
another trade agreement that keeps foreign workers in poverty.
  The definition of madness, Mr. Speaker, is repeating the same action 
over and over again and expecting a different result. That is what 
happened: 12 years of trade agreements, 12 years of promises, 12 years 
of failed trade policy. Yet the insanity of it is we keep doing the 
same thing. We keep passing more trade agreements.
  CAFTA simply does not make sense. The President signed CAFTA almost 1 
year ago. Since 2001, typically when the President signs an agreement, 
we vote on it within 60 days. This week, on Thursday, will be the 11-
month anniversary of the signing of CAFTA. House leaders said they are 
going to vote on it by the end of May.
  Mr. Speaker, I would close by saying when the world's poorest workers 
can buy American products, rather than make them, then we will know 
that our trade policies are finally succeeding. CAFTA will not. Vote 
``no'' on CAFTA.

                          ____________________