THIS SEARCH     THIS DOCUMENT     THIS CR ISSUE     GO TO
Next Hit        Forward           Next Document     New CR Search
Prev Hit        Back              Prev Document     HomePage
Hit List        Best Sections     Daily Digest      Help
                Contents Display

[Page: H3132]  GPO's PDF
---

   The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under a previous order of the House, the gentlewoman from Ohio (Ms. Kaptur) is recognized for five minutes.

   Ms. KAPTUR. Mr. Speaker, I rise tonight to highlight the flaws in the Bush administration's trade policy, a plan to trade away even more of America's jobs, our national security, and even our sovereignty.

   Word came today that the administration will once again try to bring back to this House an irresponsible fast track bill and seek its passage. This proposal obviously is not the road to a prosperous future for working families in our country, because throughout our country we see the fruits of NAFTA : Closed factories, a jobless recovery, and downward pressure on wages.

   From Iowa to New Hampshire to the Carolinas and everywhere in between,

[Page: H3133]  GPO's PDF

   NAFTA passed almost eight years ago. Ask any American worker standing in an unemployment line, ``How has NAFTA affected you?'' It has been almost two years since Congress passed permanent normal trade relations with China. Ask any American worker standing in an unemployment line, ``How has trade with China affected you?'' The answer to both questions is the same: More layoffs, more factory shutdowns, and more plants being moved to China and Mexico.

   If the fast track conference bill passes the House, President Bush will push Congress to pass a whole new NAFTA : NAFTA for the Americas. Basically this would mean a free trade region encompassing 34 nations in our hemisphere. To the produce-producing States like Florida and California, instead of just Mexico they will have to face an onslaught from more countries, 31 to be exact, with low wages and no environmental regulations. To our beef producers, imagine beef from Argentina imported tariff-free. Grains, citrus fruits, cut flowers, and just about every other good available in the world will be flooding our markets tariff-free.

   The Founding Fathers gave Congress the power to regulate all international commerce. It is right in our Constitution. Some of our colleagues on the other side of the aisle may not know this, or worse, may not care. Our constituents did not send us here to sign over our constitutional duties to the executive branch. That is not why we were elected. They elected us to represent their interests, not only those of multinational corporations hoping to report another penny or two on their quarterly profits at the expense of America's workers.

   Pick up a paper in just about any city on any given day and the report reads, ``IBM to Cut 1,500 Jobs in Microelectronics Unit.'' Or how about this one: ``Hewlett Packard CEO Carly Fiorina Sees 15,000 Job Cuts,'' or ``Williamson-Dickie Becomes Latest Textile Employer to Close Factory.'' How will America defend herself without any manufacturing infrastructure? Do you really believe we should import the goods from China, Pakistan or Indonesia as substitutes for our own?

   The other body fiercely debated something called Chapter 11 of the NAFTA agreement as it considered its bill. That little clause would allow a corporation from another country to sue a city, a State, or even the United States Government in an attempt to undermine our environmental, food safety, and consumer protection laws.

   Take the case of a Canadian company that recently sued the State of California over a State environmental law. California banned MTBE because it was contaminating groundwater. Federalism at work; right? Not under NAFTA . Using chapter 11 , the Canadian company sued the State. Not in court, but before a secret NAFTA tribunal, claiming the law was trade-restrictive.

   If we cannot protect our own health and safety, we give our rights to multinational corporations. What kind of sovereignty is that? It is ridiculous that the Bush administration wants to give more power to just a few foreign companies and ignore our local communities. What kind of a trade policy is it that leads to more unemployment, more pollution, and a deterioration of our constitutional rights of sovereignty?

   I would ask my colleagues to say no to more fast tracks, say no to NAFTA for the Americas, say yes to a future for working families and jobs in our own communities.

THIS SEARCH     THIS DOCUMENT     THIS CR ISSUE     GO TO
Next Hit        Forward           Next Document     New CR Search
Prev Hit        Back              Prev Document     HomePage
Hit List        Best Sections     Daily Digest      Help
                Contents Display