[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 153 (2007), Part 20]
[House]
[Pages 28579-28580]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




                              {time}  1945
                        THE PERU TRADE AGREEMENT

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under a previous order of the House, the 
gentleman from Maine (Mr. Michaud) is recognized for 5 minutes.
  Mr. MICHAUD. I thank Madam Speaker. This weekend, Senator John 
Edwards announced his opposition to the Peru Trade Agreement. The 
reason? As his statement says, ``All of these agreements replicate the 
terrible features of NAFTA.'' Senator Edwards is right. It is more of 
the same old, same old. A leading Presidential candidate is saying it. 
The American people are sick of it. And so why is Congress pushing for 
it? Why would we push for a steady stream of lost jobs that gives 
incentives to multinational corporations to move overseas? Why would we 
agree to an agreement that would displace peasant farmers who would be 
forced to migrate to the United States?
  The American public aren't fooled. Campaign finance reform hasn't 
stopped the incredible financial influence of multinational 
corporations. These corporations are weighing in with the candidates, 
even Citibank. Take, for example, the provisions hidden in the Peru 
FTA. As Senator Edwards points out, ``Buried deep in the 800-page text 
of the Peru FTA are ambiguous provisions that could allow U.S. banks to 
demand compensation if Peru reverses its disastrous social security 
privatization.''
  The Peru FTA contains provisions that could allow Citibank to demand 
compensation in FTA foreign investor protection tribunals from the 
Peruvian Government if Peru seeks to reverse its failed social security 
privatization. The Peruvian archbishop and both labor federation 
presidents asked the Ways and Means leaders to fix this problem. And it 
hasn't been fixed.
  The House floor will be voting on this in a couple of weeks. As a 
Democratic Party, we have stood united against privatization of Social 
Security. We have not backed down. That is why it

[[Page 28580]]

shocks me to hear that Senator Obama supports the Peru FTA. Yes, 
Senator Obama does support the Peru FTA.
  Senator Edwards has it right. It is time to stick up for the American 
workers. It is time to reject the same NAFTA model that has devastated 
our industry. It is time to listen to the broad list of groups who do 
not support the Peru FTA. Not one union, environmental, consumer, small 
business, faith, family farm group supports the modified Bush Peru 
NAFTA Expansion FTA. So why would any Presidential candidate?
  It is important to hear what the candidates are saying about 
protecting our jobs and fighting for fair trade deals. It is important 
that we stick together in this fight to keep our jobs here at home. I 
encourage my colleagues to vote ``no'' on the Peru FTA.

                          ____________________