From: Jason Mark (jason@globalexchange.org)
Date: Tue Jul 23 2002 - 11:50:02 EDT
Dear Friends,
We write to you today to update you on Fast Track Trade Negotiating
Authority and also to let you know what you can do to help this week.
(Note: If you happen to receive this message multiple times, we are truly
sorry. There is a problem with our mail server. Trust that we are doing our
best to fix it and hope to avoid duplications in the future. Apologies for
any inconvenience.)
In this update you will find:
1. Update on Fastrack
2. What can you do THIS WEEK to stop Fast Track?
3. ACTION ALERT: NATIONAL CALL-IN DAY, JULY 25 TO STOP FAST TRACK
4. Article in Friday's The Wall Street Journal about President Bush's
demand for FAST TRACK.
5. OP-Ed: Fast Track is wrong on number of fronts
By Art Pulaski and Jon Rainwater
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
UPDATE ON FAST TRACK
President Bush has been pushing hard to get FAST TRACK passed before the
August recess, which begins on July 26th. It doesn't look like that is
going to happen, however. Fast Track is currently being debated in a
conference committee of Congress. On Tuesday, July 16th Senate Finance
Committee Chairman Max Baucus (D-MT) said that it is unlikely the Fast
Track trade conference will complete its work before the August recess.
This is good for us because it gives us the whole month on August and
possibly September too to put pressure on our elected representatives and
organize against FAST TRACK.
Senator Baucus also said, "If we start working very quickly we can get a lot
of work done before the [August] recess," said Baucus. He stressed that a
number of House Democrats would support the fast track trade package as long
as it included the Senate's expansion of Trade Adjustment Assistance.
"My guess is the more the TAA is included in the conference report, the more
likely it is that Democrats who previously voted against it" will support
the final conference report, Baucus said. He said there must be "sufficient"
TAA in the final package, and that the conference report should not deviate
from the Senate bill on this point if it is to gain support. (Information
provided by July 16, 2002 edition of Inside U.S. Trade).
What is TRADE ADJUSTMENT ASSISTANCE (TAA)?
TAA is a package of unemployment benefits that are supposed to cushion the
blow for workers laid off because of international trade. The classic
example is a worker whose employer has decided to move its factory
operations to Mexico to take advantage of cheap labor and NAFTA benefits
across the border. The previous TAA packages, passed along with NAFTA and
renewed each year, have been woefully inadequate in keeping up with the
increasing numbers of people who require TAA. They are under-funded, do not
cover secondary workers (like the people who supply the factories that move
or the janitorial staff in these factories or the truckers who transport the
goods the factories used to make). This time around (in May), the Senate
passed a TAA that, although by no means perfect, takes some steps forward by
covering more secondary workers and providing 70% up-front government
subsidies of healthcare COBRA costs (COBRA allows workers to continue to buy
healthcare at the group/company rate as opposed to being forced to seek
healthcare insurance as an individual on the expensive and inaccessible open
market). The Senate passed TAA program, while still nowhere near what is
needed to provide real assistance to laid off workers, is significantly more
comprehensive than the non-existent House version and this has the House GOP
leadership in a tizzy. They would like to force workers into the private,
individual market and provide laid off workers with a tax rebate instead of
up-front funding. This means that, if the House GOP have their way, if you
get sick in December, you wouldn't get any relief from the government until
April. Too bad if you can't wait that long. (Information provided by Public
Citizen).
SO, TAA is one of the issues that the conference committee is debating and
trying to clarify before Fast Track comes up for a 2nd vote in the House of
Representatives. Remember, the first vote (in which we lost by one vote)
was in December. The Senate vote was in May. In addition to TAA, the trade
packages passed by the Senate and House include rival versions of fast
track, a renewed and expanded Andean Trade Preferences Act (ATPA)
and a bill to renew the Generalized System of Preferences.
The Senate version of TAA is more expensive than the House bill and would
offer workers displaced by trade a more expansive set of benefits. In
contrast, the House ATPA bill would provide more expansive benefits to
Andean nations than the Senate bill by providing limited duty-free access
for apparel made from regional fabric.
The Senate bill also includes an amendment, sponsored by Sens. Mark Dayton
(D-MN) and Larry Craig (R-ID) and added during the floor debate, that would
carve out changes to U.S. trade laws from fast track authority. The White
House has strongly suggested it would veto a trade bill that included the
Dayton-Craig language.
We need to let the White House and Congress know that we are watching and we
do not want FAST TRACK!!! We need your help to stop it!
Please pass along this e-mail to your family and friends all across the
country. Together we will STOP FAST TRACK once and for all!
For background info on FAST TRACK, please see:
http://www.globalexchange.org/fasttrack
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
WHAT CAN YOU DO?
1. CALL YOUR REPRESENTATIVE
The AFL-CIO is sponsoring a toll free number for you to express your
opinions to your elected representatives. All you have to do is call
1-877-611-0063 and you will be connected to the Capitol switch board. You
may ask for your representative by name. You can leave a message with the
voicemail if there is no person to answer the phone. You can also call your
Representative at their District Office.
When you get your Representativešs office, let them know that you want to
convey your OPPOSITION to "Fast Track". Make sure that your Representative
hears that you want them to vote AGAINST Fast Track, and that you strongly
believe the formation of trade policy should be open, transparent and
democratic.
2. MEET WITH YOUR MEMBER OF CONGRESS
Meet with you member of Congress when they return to your district for the
month of August. Call their office to set up an appointment with them or
their aides.
3. Send Letters to the Editor about Fast Track.
4. ORGANIZE A TOWN HALL MEETING
***FOR MORE BACKGROUND INFORMATION AND IDEAS ON WHAT YOU CAN DO TO STOP FAST
TRACK, PLEASE CHECK OUR WEBSITE AT:
http://globalexchange.org/fasttrack/ or e-mail us at ftaa@globalexchange.org
***YOU CAN NOW DOWNLOAD OUR FAST TRACK ACTION KIT ONLINE AT:
http://www.globalexchange.org/fasttrack/FTToolKit.pdf
You can also check out www.tradewatch.org for more information!
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
***ACTION ALERT: NATIONAL CALL-IN DAY, JULY 25 TO STOP FAST TRACK***
JOBS With JUSTICE has put out a call for all to call their representatives
on July 25th. Use the AFL-CIO Call-In # 1-877-611-0063 to CALL YOUR REP.
You can also call the Capitol switchboard at 202-224-3121.
For more information on Jobs with Justice check out:
http://www.jobswithjustice.org/
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Wall Street Journal
July 19, 2002
WASHINGTON -- Eager for an economic-policy victory amid corporate-accounting
scandals and market turmoil, President Bush is turning up the heat on
Congress to pass his top-priority trade bill.
The president summoned key lawmakers from both parties to the White House
Thursday evening, hoping to end a House-Senate logjam over a "fast track"
bill that would allow him to negotiate trade pacts without congressional
tinkering.
"It's a top priority to get it done," said U.S. Trade Representative Robert
Zoellick. "What better way is there for the Congress and the administration
to give a boost in terms of the economic recovery?"
Democrats had been grousing for weeks that Mr. Bush isn't personally
involved in the scrap on the Hill, beyond making general pronouncements
about the bill's importance. But Thursday, Mr. Zoellick, Commerce Secretary
Donald Evans and White House congressional liaison Nicholas E. Calio hit
Capitol Hill in the hopes -- however distant -- that Congress will act
before breaking for vacation at the end of next week. The lobbying effort
was followed by the president's half-hour, Cabinet Room pitch to members of
the House-Senate conference negotiating panel trying to work out differences
between bills passed by the two chambers. Mr. Bush presented the legislation
as critical to American leadership abroad, according to people present.
"If the White House is personally involved in a truly bipartisan way, this
will be resolved very quickly," Sen. Max Baucus (D., Mont.), chairman of the
Finance Committee, said afterwards. "The more they turn it over to the
Congress and don't get involved, the more likely this could be an extended
conference."
Earlier in the week, the conference had been stalled by a spat between Mr.
Baucus and House Ways and Means Chairman Bill Thomas (R., Calif.) over who
gets to be chairman of negotiations. Thursday, before the White House
meeting, the two men agreed that Mr. Thomas would be chairman of the
conference committee on trade, while Mr. Baucus would be chairman of one on
Medicare, should it come up.
"We need to get confidence going back in a positive direction," said William
Morley, chief trade lobbyist for the U.S. Chamber of Commerce.
But behind the political maneuvering lie ideological divisions on the Hill
over how to handle free trade, which can have broad benefits for the economy
as a whole but can exact a high price from certain industries, workers or
areas of the country. Fast-track negotiating authority -- under which
Congress agrees to consider any new trade agreement on an up-or-down vote
with no amendments -- requires faith on the part of lawmakers that the
president will protect their interests, and those of their constituents.
"What is surprising is that Big Business and the Bush administration are
willing to end-run congressional checks and balances on future trade
agreements at a time when the American people's trust in corporations is so
low," said John Sweeney, AFL-CIO labor union president.
Mr. Bush, for his part, argues that without fast track, he will be hobbled
in his ability to negotiate a hemisphere-wide free-trade area or a new
global round of trade liberalization. Yet even though Mr. Bush has made a
play for congressional support in recent months by slapping tariffs on
imported steel and lumber, many labor-friendly Democrats, and even some
Republicans, have been reluctant to give Mr. Bush a free hand.
"We're hopeful that adult intervention can be a positive thing," said one
Senate Democratic aide.
-- Greg Hitt contributed to this article.
Write to Michael M. Phillips at michael.phillips@wsj.com
<mailto:michael.phillips@wsj.com> 1
URL for this article:
http://online.wsj.com/article/0,,SB1027038158763599880.djm,00.html
http://online.wsj.com/article/0,,SB1027038158763599880.djm,00.html
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fast Track is wrong on number of fronts
By Art Pulaski and Jon Rainwater
COMMENTARY
Posted on Sun, Jul. 14, 2002
LAST YEAR, while corporations were laying off thousands of workers in the
aftermath of Sept. 11, many of their lobbyists were pushing President Bush's
trade legislation known as "Fast Track."
Fast Track, sometimes called trade promotion authority, is a procedure that
reduces Congress members' role in developing trade agreements to voting yes
or no on completed pacts -- while stripping them of the ability to make
amendments. Fast Track is a creature of the Nixon administration, and
emerged at a time when trade policy involved little more than tariffs and
quotas. In today's global economy, however, trade agreements can be complex
and far-reaching, with potential impact on food safety, workers' rights and
the environment.
In December, the Republican House leadership rammed Fast Track trade
authority through Congress by a single vote, using procedural shenanigans
and pork-barrel deals. Rep. Ellen Tauscher, D-Alamo, voted against it.
Opponents of Fast Track pointed out the legislation would grant the
president unusually broad authority to negotiate suspect trade agreements.
They also said that by denying Congress its traditional role in forming the
nation's policy, Fast Track removes a key provision of the checks and
balances that drive our system.
Unfortunately, the bill still passed. And as approved, the House version has
serious ramifications for workers, the environment and democracy itself. For
example, the bill expands the NAFTA (North America Free Trade Agreement)
investment provision known as "Chapter 11," which allows foreign
corporations to sue the state or federal government for their adherence to
laws that protect the public health in the name of profit protection. As
written into NAFTA, Chapter 11 disputes are decided by non-elected,
three-person trade tribunals that are closed to the public. NAFTA panels
have ruled against environment laws in almost all cases, even when required
for international treaty compliance.
Now, corporations are lobbying the Bush administration to expand these
Chapter 11 rights to the entire Western Hemisphere. The administration is
currently in the later stages of negotiating the World Trade Organization's
General Agreement on Trade in Services and the Free Trade Area of the
Americas, which would expand NAFTA to the entire hemisphere beginning in
2005. The expansion of this undemocratic provision could allow many of
California's strong environmental laws to be attacked -- even removed --
through challenges by multinational corporations.
This issue hits close to home: Methanex Corp., a Canadian manufacturer of
the toxic gasoline additive MTBE, is suing the United States for $970
million in one of these NAFTA tribunals. The Legislature banned the additive
after widespread MTBE contamination of drinking water sources became a major
public health concern in the mid-1990s. The company claims that the ban is
an "expropriation" of "future projected profits," and that Californians
should have to pay the polluter to keep the MTBE ban on the books.
Fast Track limped through the Senate in May, so Congress has to reconcile
the versions. The Senate version contained a partial subsidy to enable
workers who lose their jobs through trade to maintain their health
insurance, and expanded the number of workers eligible to receive
assistance.
However, the upper house excluded a large segment of trade-affected workers,
including contract workers, making them ineligible for unemployment benefits
and training as well as health care. This was a particularly painful slight
to high-tech workers, 40 percent of whom are in contract or non-traditional
employment. The House version is even weaker on workers' rights than the
Senate version. The need for protective language is critical, as job loss
due to the flawed NAFTA. According to the Economic Policy Institute, that
agreement has already cost more than 3 million American jobs since 1994 --
310,000 in California alone.
The House leadership has guaranteed there's no chance that improved
protections for workers or the environment will be part of the final trade
package, or that even the inadequate protections contained in the Senate
bill will survive intact. We urge Tauscher to protect workers and the
environment and oppose Fast Track again.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Pulaski is executive secretary treasurer of the California Labor Federation,
AFL-CIO. Rainwater is executive director of the California League of
Conservation Voters.
____________________________________________________________________
Global Exchange http://www.globalexchange.org
To unsubscribe, email globaljustice-request@globalexchange.org with
unsubscribe
in the body of the message.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Mon Oct 28 2002 - 02:52:33 EST