[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 152 (2006), Part 5]
[House]
[Page 6937]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




                     OMAN-PERU FREE TRADE AGREEMENT

  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Gohmert). Under a previous order of the 
House, the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Linda T. Sanchez) is 
recognized for 5 minutes.
  Ms. LINDA T. SANCHEZ of California. Mr. Speaker, a year ago in this 
body, we were talking about this Central American Free Trade Agreement 
or CAFTA's terrible labor provisions.
  At that time, Member after Member raised serious concerns about 
CAFTA's failure to protect working people here in the United States and 
abroad. However, the Bush administration ignored every single one of 
those serious flaws with the CAFTA trade deal. Now the Bush 
administration is asking this House to consider the Oman and Peru Free 
Trade Agreements.
  I would call it a new deal, except there is nothing new about it. I 
have looked at the labor provisions in the deal, Mr. Speaker, and they 
are identical to those in CAFTA. The administration has changed 
nothing, absolutely nothing at all.
  So, Mr. Speaker, again I need to say that there is a message we need 
to send to the President. The message is very simple: No on the CAFTA 
model, no to inadequate labor protections, and no to the Oman and Peru 
agreements.
  If you want to protect workers' rights, if you stand for labor 
protection, if you want to halt job losses in this country, then say no 
to the CAFTA model, say no to inadequate labor protection, and say no 
to the Oman and Peru agreements.
  The CAFTA model hurts hardworking people here in the United States, 
in Oman and in Peru. Not surprisingly, the Oman and Peru trade deals 
will hurt U.S. workers in the same industries that were alienated by 
CAFTA. It is not a surprise to anyone that I am talking about textiles 
and sugar production.
  The labor standards in Oman and Peru are simply not acceptable. As 
recently as last year, the Bush administration's very own State 
Department publicly stated that Oman has an unacceptable standard for 
the trafficking of people into involuntary labor.
  The same was formally acknowledged regarding Peru, including a 
special note that child labor was a serious problem there.
  Honestly, I do not understand this administration. At the same time 
that the administration negotiated these agreements, it also published 
a report detailing the extensive labor problems in both of these 
countries. Even children working in a factory making bricks in Lima, 
Peru, do not have the legal right to, and I quote the administration's 
report, ``remove themselves from potentially dangerous situations''.
  We need to say no to the Oman and Peru agreements, not just to 
protect our labor rights here in the United States but also, 
importantly, to set the global standard for labor rights around the 
world.
  It was not so long ago that many in this House rejected and argued 
against CAFTA. Guess what? The arguments against the Oman and Peru 
agreements are the exact same ones, because it is the exact same 
agreement.
  I ask my colleagues not to be fooled. Do not believe that this is a 
new approach for trade, because absolutely nothing has changed.
  I, for one, am going to stand up again for labor rights here in the 
United States and abroad, and I encourage my colleagues to do the same.

                          ____________________