[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 151 (2005), Part 9]
[House]
[Pages 12214-12215]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




                                 CAFTA

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under a previous order of the House, the 
gentlewoman from California (Ms. Solis) is recognized for 5 minutes.
  Ms. SOLIS. Mr. Speaker, today I also rise to join my colleagues in 
opposition to the Dominican Republic Central American Free Trade 
Agreement, known as CAFTA. The gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Brown) and 
other Members of Congress will shortly be speaking for a special hour 
to take note of the negative effects that CAFTA will have not only on 
the American public, but also our relatives and friends that live in 
Central America.
  I have the distinction of being one of the few Members of Congress 
with family that lives in Central America. I have seen firsthand for 
myself the conditions that people are currently living in there right 
now, in a small country known as Nicaragua where the poverty levels are 
just outrageous. There is no relief that will come through CAFTA, in my 
opinion.
  As I see it right now, what we have learned from the NAFTA trade 
agreement that was passed some 10 years ago, before I came to this 
House, we will see the same pillaging occur with individuals who 
represent Central American countries, particularly young women. The 
pattern does not change.
  In my visit there 2 years ago, I had a chance to see women outside at 
5 o'clock in the morning, over 300 women lining up to enter into these 
maquilas, these assembly plants, if you will, in free trade zones that 
were set up in El Salvador and Nicaragua. In El Salvador they were 
lined up to begin their work of 12 to maybe 14 hours a day, gaining 
maybe less than $30 a week, living far from their families in areas 
that would not provide them with decent housing or even sanitation. And 
I am concerned because when we talk as a country, a

[[Page 12215]]

great Nation protecting the rights of our workers here, we also set an 
example for those individuals that represent other foreign countries 
when we say we want to open up fair trade agreements.
  In my opinion, this is not an agreement that I support. I can tell 
you by hearing from people there firsthand that have told me that they 
do not believe that they are going to reap any benefits; that the 
profits will go to the big corporations, whether they are U.S. or other 
foreign entities. That money, I do not believe, will stay there to help 
restabilize and provide infrastructure, clinics, education and decent 
housing for the people that will be working there for many years to 
come.
  In fact, what we have seen occur in Mexico is that, yes, we set up 
our maquiladoras there along the border in an area like Ciudad Juarez, 
and soon we found that they could go for cheaper labor by leaving 
there, almost half of those maquilas, and transporting their factories 
to China where they could get a lower cost for wage labor and provide 
less protections for people in the workplace. Meanwhile, those products 
are coming back to this country.
  My question is, why is it that this country feels somehow that it is 
good to provide incentives for big corporations who do not pay taxes 
here and allow for the squalor and mistreatment of people in an 
inhumane way abroad, yet we are supposed to be setting an example?

                              {time}  1945

  I know that the President a year ago introduced this proposal, and he 
has yet to bring it up because I understand that his own party is not 
in support. He has many Members that are very reluctant to support 
CAFTA because we have seen a number of jobs, over 750,000, that have 
left this country. In my district alone during NAFTA, we lost more than 
1,000 jobs, many in the textile and agricultural industry, many of 
those low-paying jobs that were held by Latinos.
  So when I think about CAFTA, I think about what is going to happen 
again to those individuals in this country, people who are right now 
trying to make a living and will see soon their jobs leave this country 
and go abroad. What will they then be left with holding the bag?
  All I can tell everyone is that there are many of us here, including 
the Congressional Hispanic Caucus, 14 members, a good majority of our 
Members, who voted against CAFTA, and I hope that everyone here is 
paying attention because we are not just speaking from our own 
districts, but we are talking also about individuals representing those 
different countries who have come here on different pilgrimages to come 
and talk and inform us as legislators. They too will be here this week 
to talk to us about what they see in terms of the wrongness about this 
CAFTA agreement.
  And I hope that Members in our party as well as the other side of the 
aisle will come to some reason that we could maybe put this aside and 
maybe renegotiate this whole effort because I do believe, Mr. Speaker, 
that we are heading down a wrong path. I do not want to see any more of 
our jobs leaving and then bringing about what I would call a 
suppression of the workforce in those Central American countries, 
particularly when it affects women. When we see 14- and 15-year-old 
women having to work for 14 and maybe 16 hours a day, 6 days a week, 
not being able to go to school, not having any health care coverage, 
not having a decent wage to help support their own families, then I 
have to ask the question why are we heading down that path? And that is 
something that I truly believe my constituents support me on, and I 
have heard from them as well. We had a forum at Cal State Los Angeles 
recently where we had ten individual witnesses speak, and there is a 
resounding no for CAFTA.
  So I would urge my colleagues to pay attention and to heed the 
concerns that we have here in the Congress such as the gentleman from 
Ohio (Mr. Brown) and other Members that have been leading the cause.

                          ____________________