OH-16: John Boccieri’s Economic Plan

Cross-posted from OH-16: John Boccieri for U.S. Congress:

John Boccieri has a plan to reform America’s trade policies and restore our competitiveness.

Reforming Trade and Restoring America’s Competitiveness

Unfair trade practices have had a devastating impact on our local communities. Since 2001, the state of Ohio has lost more than 102,000 jobs to China alone – the 5th highest amount of all 50 U.S. states.

Two thirds of U.S. jobs lost to China have come from our manufacturing sector, which won’t surprise local community members who have seen factories closed and jobs shipped away.

John Boccieri believes that America can become a strong competitor again, but we need a major change in our approach to the global economy.

Here is what Senator Major John Boccieri(D-Alliance) has laid out for us:

Put America first when it comes to trade:

The fast-growing economies of countries like China would collapse if U.S. consumers weren’t buying their goods. Instead of rubberstamping bad trade deals written by international corporate lobbyists, leaders in Washington should use that leverage to negotiate fair trade deals that benefit America’s workforce.

Of course, John’s opponent thinks our first priority should be extending the “Bush-onomics” of “lowering the capital gains tax”. This additional tax cut does nothing more than lower federal revenue, line the pockets of businesses, and the wealthiest of investors.

Enhance and enforce fair international trade standards:

We should use our global economic leverage to increase labor, human-rights and environmental standards around the world, not weaken our own protections in a race to the bottom. We should push countries like China to stop manipulating currency values, open their markets to U.S. exports, and honor and enforce standards that will level the playing field for American workers.

Of course, John’s opponent thinks our second priority should be a “crack down on the frivolous lawsuits”. We’re not stupid; this is simply a code phrase for “Tort Reform”, lowering the penalty against manufacturers of faulty products that injure, maim, and kill unsuspecting consumers and workers to just $250,000. Is this “fair compensation” for the life of your family’s bread-winner?

Protect the health and safety of American consumers:

Higher international trade standards won’t just help U.S. workers – they will protect American consumers from lead-tainted toys, poisonous pet food, or other dangers of cheap but poorly-regulated overseas production.

Gosh, I think I just covered this one with my last comment! Just for the sake of fairness, his opponent suggests “Regulatory Reform”. “Tort Reform” becomes an insurance policy for this irresponsible cousin.

Restore fiscal responsibility in Washington:

President Bush will leave us with the largest deficit in American history, and his reckless spending has driven us deeply into debt. Other nations have bought huge amounts of our debt to manipulate international currency values to their advantage. Restoring spending sanity in Washington is an important step to improving our balance of trade.

John’s opponent claims he will “fight to restore the fiscal discipline for which Republicans were once known”. This leads to a serious question; “Just how do you propose to “restore fiscal responsibility” while we spend $12 billion per month on The Iraq War?”

Reward investment in America:

We should reward companies that find innovative ways to create jobs and compete right here in the United States. These businesses should receive tax breaks, first priority for state and federal contracts, and other benefits to help them grow and succeed.

John’s opponent suggests “reforming unfair trade laws” that were put on the “fast-track” by the Bush/Cheney administration. Wouldn’t we find this much simpler to achieve had we never entered into these “trade agreements” without first making sure America’s middle-class working families were put first and foremost?

Turn around our education system:

America has fewer students graduating from high school today than we did a generation ago. We need to put a diploma and college or skills training within reach of every single young American by making smart investments in education, expanding much-needed grants and loans, and offering scholarships in exchange for public service.

John’s opponent proposes to “shift the burden of funding from property taxes to sales and income taxes”. Does it make sense that John’s opponent wants to lower taxes for the wealthiest investors and raise taxes on the working middle class while we spend $12 Billion per month in Iraq?

Support and invest in displaced workers:

Workers whose jobs have been outsourced often lose their health insurance and pensions, too, and even if they find new jobs they rarely pay as well. We need effective workforce retraining programs, stronger protections for pensions, and a health care system that gives every American coverage that is portable, affordable, and not subject to pre-existing conditions.

John’s opponent proposes to “Create Economic Empowerment Zones”. “Strengthening partnerships between industry and government” reads like the lobbyists win, again. Albeit, the “free market principles”, such as health care savings accounts, tax credits, and employer reimbursement reads much like the “Bush Privatization Model”.

Make our economy work for all Americans again:

We have to end the disconnect between booming corporate profits and stagnating middle class incomes. When CEO salaries rise, workers’ paychecks and benefits should grow, too.

“Senator Schuring is welcome to keep defending Bob Taft’s policies and looking out for the corporate executives who fund his campaign. I’m focused on relief for the working families who are being hit hardest by our economic crisis.” ~ Senator John Boccieri, July 23, 2008

Invest in industries that can’t be outsourced:

Producing our own energy here in America is a matter of national security. The Apollo Alliance estimates that the development of renewable domestic energy sources like wind farms, solar arrays, biofuel crops, and geothermal, nuclear, and clean coal plants would create more than 23,000 new “green collar” jobs in Ohio. Half a million more jobs could see wage and benefit growth from those investments.

Industries like this are the key to new jobs and prosperity for generations of Americans to come.

It’s a 4355 mile commute to ANWR and if traffic is in your favor you might make it there in 90 hours!

Ryan For Kentucky: Lets Fight for American Workers

At Ryan for Kentucky, we believe that the playing field has been tilted against working families for far too long. My whole life, it seems that war has been waged on union workers and workers attempting to form new unions. I have witnessed this personally in a union fight. Although initially, 80% of the workers at our warehouse signed on to become union, the long process allowed the company to come in and “behind the scenes” peel off these votes. How? By turning worker against worker. Promising promotion of certain workers, and higher wages and more benefits if the union failed.

In the end, After workers being bribed and intimidated on the day of the union vote, it failed by one vote. Then, a month after the union vote, ou company announced it was shutting down our warehouse and moving elsewhere.

Yes, the playing field has long been tilted against workers in this country organizing new unions. The Bush years have only seen it grow worse. Our Representative, Exxon Ed Whitfield has been a constant enemy of workers having the right to organize for better lives.

He voted against the Employee Free Choice Act which would put an end to the problems I just described. Yes, to millionaires like Ed Whitfield, employees should not have the right to negotiate with corporations and companies that pull in billions of dollars a year for better wages and benefits.

But it goes much deeper than that. Exxon Ed Whitfield never met a free trade agreement he didn’t love. Forget the fact that American high-paying middle-class jobs that have been the backbone of this country since WWII are being shipped overseas by greedy corporations. Forget the fact that Free Trade has cost the American worker dearly, Exxon Eddie doesn’t even believe in helping those whose livelihoods were lost by the corporate sponsored government policies of greed, and profit:

Voted NO on assisting workers who lose jobs due to globalization.

H.R.3920: Trade and Globalization Act of 2007: Amends the Trade Act of 1974 to allow the filing for trade adjustment assistance (TAA) by adversely affected workers. Revises group eligibility requirements for TAA to cover: (1) a shift of production or services to abroad; or (2) imports of articles or services from abroad.

Proponents support voting YES because:

Rep. RANGEL: In recent years, trade policy has been a dividing force. This legislation develops a new trade policy that more adequately addresses the growing perception that trade is not working for American workers. The Trade and Globalization Assistance Act would expand training and benefits for workers while also helping to encourage investment in communities that have lost jobs to increased trade–particularly in our manufacturing sector. The bill is a comprehensive policy expanding opportunities for American workers, industries, and communities to prepare for and overcome the challenges created by expanded trade.

Reference: Trade and Globalization Assistance Act; Bill HR3920 ; vote number 2007-1025 on Oct 31, 2007

http://www.massscorecard.org/H…

Lets look back at all the bad deals Exxon Ed Whitfield has voted for to destroy the American middle-class, and preserve corporate profits at all costs. His old buddy Tom Delay, whom he Tried to bail out and voted with 91% of the time  co-sponsored this one:

Voted YES on implementing free trade agreement with Chile.

United States-Chile Free Trade Agreement Implementation Act: Vote to pass a bill that would put into effect a trade agreement between the US and Chile. The agreement would reduce tariffs and trade barriers between the US and Chile. The trade pact would decrease duties and tariffs on agricultural and textile products. It would also open markets for services. The trade pact would establish intellectual property safeguards and would call for enforcement of environmental and labor standards.

Reference: Bill sponsored by DeLay, R-TX; Bill HR 2738 ; vote number 2003-436 on Jul 24, 2003

And it just goes on and on:

Voted YES on implementing US-Singapore free trade agreement.

Vote to pass a bill that would put into effect a trade agreement between the United States and Singapore. The trade agreement would reduce tariffs and trade barriers between the United States and Singapore. The agreement would remove tariffs on goods and duties on textiles, and open markets for services The agreement would also establish intellectual property, environmental and labor standards.

Reference: US-Singapore Free Trade Agreement; Bill HR 2739 ; vote number 2003-432 on Jul 24, 2003

http://www.massscorecard.org/H…

Voted YES on implementing US-Australia Free Trade Agreement.

United States-Australia Free Trade Agreement Implementation Act: implementing free trade with protections for the domestic textile and apparel industries.

Reference: Bill sponsored by Rep Tom DeLay [R, TX-22]; Bill H.R.4759 ; vote number 2004-375 on Jul 14, 2005

http://www.massscorecard.org/H…

Voted YES on implementing CAFTA, Central America Free Trade.

To implement the Dominican Republic-Central America-United States Free Trade Agreement. A vote of YES would:

Progressively eliminate customs duties on all originating goods traded among the participating nations

Preserve U.S. duties on imports of sugar goods over a certain quota

Remove duties on textile and apparel goods traded among participating nations

Prohibit export subsidies for agricultural goods traded among participating nations

Provide for cooperation among participating nations on customs laws and import licensing procedures

Encourage each participating nation to adopt and enforce laws ensuring high levels of sanitation and environmental protection

Recommend that each participating nation uphold the International Labor Organization Declaration on Fundamental Principles and Rights at Work

Urge each participating nation to obey various international agreements regarding intellectual property rights

Reference: CAFTA Implementation Bill; Bill HR 3045 ; vote number 2005-443 on Jul 28, 2005

Whitfield’s was thedeciding vote on that one.

Then we ended with this:

Voted YES on promoting free trade with Peru.

Approves the Agreement entered into with the government of Peru. Provides for the Agreement’s entry into force upon certain conditions being met on or after January 1, 2008.

Prescribes requirements for:

enforcement of textile and apparel rules of origin;

certain textile and apparel safeguard measures; and

enforcement of export laws governing trade of timber products from Peru.

http://www.massscorecard.org/H…

We need a leader in Washington who doesn’t scorn and ridicule American workers daily. We need a leader in Washington who believes that America should indeed have a middle-class:

It is not hard to figure out that outsourcing American jobs to third world countries is destroying our middle class.  We must stop rewarding companies who send our jobs oversees with tax cuts and begin rewarding companies who invest in our nations future.  

As a member of a staunch union family, and a former union member myself, I understand first hand the need for a living wage as well as benefits and training programs.  I will work tirelessly to fight for the rights of the working person.  For far too long, the citizens of Kentucky have been victimized by the million dollar boy’s club.  It is time for change!

http://www.ryanforkentucky.com…

New leadership brings promise to Kentucky, and American workers!!:

Heather Ryan

Old leadership brings about the same old complaints:

eddie

Please, help us win this race and bring a young, energetic, and most of all compassionate leader who isn’t afraid to fight for workers and Democratic values to Washington:

Goal Thermometer

 

KY-01: Exxon Ed Whitfield’s Horrible Record

I know many people haven’t heard of Ed Whitfield, Congressman from Kentucky’s First Congressional District. He has kept a low-profile and has few accomplishments to show for it. Despite this, Ed Whitfield has quietly amassed a record of rubber-stamping President Bush and the Republican leadership in all their failed glory.

Don’t just take my word for it, the record is there for all to see. Ed Whitfield has constantly voted against the interests of Progress in this country.

On fair trade, there can be none worse. Yes, there seems to never be a trade deal Exxon Eddie didn’t like. Check it out:

Voted YES on promoting free trade with Peru.

Approves the Agreement entered into with the government of Peru. Provides for the Agreement’s entry into force upon certain conditions being met on or after January 1, 2008. Prescribes requirements for:

1. Enforcement of textile and apparel rules of origin;

2. Certain textile and apparel safeguard measures; and

3. enforcement of export laws governing trade of timber products from Peru.

Reference: Peru Trade Promotion Agreement Implementation Act; Bill H.R. 3688 ; vote number 2007-1060 on Nov 8, 2007

http://www.ontheissues.org/Hou…

Voted YES on implementing CAFTA, Central America Free Trade.

To implement the Dominican Republic-Central America-United States Free Trade Agreement. A vote of YES would:

Progressively eliminate customs duties on all originating goods traded among the participating nations

Preserve U.S. duties on imports of sugar goods over a certain quota

Remove duties on textile and apparel goods traded among participating nations

Prohibit export subsidies for agricultural goods traded among participating nations

Provide for cooperation among participating nations on customs laws and import licensing procedures

Encourage each participating nation to adopt and enforce laws ensuring high levels of sanitation and environmental protection

Recommend that each participating nation uphold the International Labor Organization Declaration on Fundamental Principles and Rights at Work

Urge each participating nation to obey various international agreements regarding intellectual property rights

Reference: CAFTA Implementation Bill; Bill HR 3045 ; vote number 2005-443 on Jul 28, 2005

http://www.ontheissues.org/Hou…

Voted YES on implementing US-Singapore free trade agreement.

Vote to pass a bill that would put into effect a trade agreement between the United States and Singapore. The trade agreement would reduce tariffs and trade barriers between the United States and Singapore. The agreement would remove tariffs on goods and duties on textiles, and open markets for services The agreement would also establish intellectual property, environmental and labor standards.

Reference: US-Singapore Free Trade Agreement; Bill HR 2739 ; vote number 2003-432 on Jul 24, 2003

http://www.ontheissues.org/Hou…

Even worse still, Exxon Eddie votes against the very workers his policies on trade leave in the cold:

Voted NO on assisting workers who lose jobs due to globalization.

H.R.3920: Trade and Globalization Act of 2007: Amends the Trade Act of 1974 to allow the filing for trade adjustment assistance (TAA) by adversely affected workers. Revises group eligibility requirements for TAA to cover: (1) a shift of production or services to abroad; or (2) imports of articles or services from abroad.

Reference: Trade and Globalization Assistance Act; Bill HR3920 ; vote number 2007-1025 on Oct 31, 2007

http://www.ontheissues.org/Hou…

Yes, Exxon Eddie is more than willing to ship our jobs overseas. Why should we help displaced workers? They are building a new Taco Bell down the street, on of those 19,000 jobs Whitfield created in 13 yrs!!

Let us not forget too that Whitfield has been a constant enabler for every failed policy of George W. Bush in the Congress. He has rubber-stamped every failed policy they sent his way:

Voted NO on redeploying US troops out of Iraq starting in 90 days.

To provide for the redeployment of US Armed Forces and defense contractors from Iraq. Requires within 90 days to commence the redeployment; and to complete such redeployment within 180 days after its commencement. Prohibits the use of DOD funds to increase the number of US forces serving in Iraq in excess of the number serving in Iraq as of January 1, 2007, unless specifically authorized by Congress. Authorizes retaining in Iraq US forces for providing security for diplomatic missions; for targeting al-Qaeda; and for training Iraqi Security Forces. Requires the President to transfer to the government of Iraq all interest held by the US in any military facility in Iraq.

Reference: Out of Iraq Caucus bill; Bill H R 2237 ; vote number 2007-330 on May 10, 2007

http://www.ontheissues.org/Hou…

Voted YES on declaring Iraq part of War on Terror with no exit date.

Voting YES would support the following resolution (excerpted):

Whereas the United States and its allies are engaged in a Global War on Terror, a long and demanding struggle against an adversary that is driven by hatred of American values and that is committed to imposing, by the use of terror, its repressive ideology throughout the world;

Whereas the terrorists have declared Iraq to be the central front in their war against all who oppose their ideology;

Whereas the United States and its Coalition partners will continue to support Iraq as part of the Global War on Terror:

Now, therefore, be it Resolved, That the House of Representatives–

Honors all those Americans who have taken an active part in the Global War on Terror;

Declares that it is not in the national security interest of the United States to set an arbitrary date for the withdrawal or redeployment of United States Armed Forces from Iraq;

Declares that the United States is committed to the completion of the mission to create a sovereign, free, secure, and united Iraq;

Declares that the United States will prevail in the Global War on Terror, the noble struggle to protect freedom from the terrorist adversary.

Reference: Resolution on Prevailing in the Global War on Terror; Bill HRES 861 ; vote number 2006-288 on Jun 12, 2006

http://www.ontheissues.org/Hou…

Voted YES on authorizing military force in Iraq.

Authorization for the Use of Military Force Against Iraq: Passage of the joint resolution that would authorize President Bush to use the US military as he deems necessary and appropriate to defend U.S. national security against Iraq and enforce UN Security Council resolutions regarding Iraq. It would be required that the president report to Congress, no later than 48 hours after using force, his determination that diplomatic options or other peaceful means would not guarantee US national security against Iraq or allow enforcement of UN resolutions and that using force is consistent with anti-terrorism efforts. The resolution would also give specific statutory authorization under the War Powers Resolution. Every 60 days the president would also be required to report to Congress on actions related to the resolution.

Reference: Bill sponsored by Hastert,R-IL; Bill HJRes114 ; vote number 2002-455 on Oct 10, 2002

http://www.ontheissues.org/Hou…

Worse even that all of this is that Ed Whitfield enabled George W. Bush in stealing the Constitutional rights of every American citizen:

Voted YES on allowing electronic surveillance without a warrant.

Amends the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978 (FISA) to allow the President & Attorney General to authorize electronic surveillance without a court order to acquire foreign intelligence information, after certifying that the surveillance is directed at the acquisition of communications of foreign agents.

Reference: Update the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978; Bill H.R.5825 ; vote number 2006-502 on Sep 28, 2006

http://www.ontheissues.org/Hou…

Voted YES on continuing intelligence gathering without civil oversight.

A resolution providing for consideration of the bill (H.R. 5020) to authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2007 for intelligence and intelligence-related activities. Voting YES indicates support of the current methods for intelligence-gathering used by the CIA and other agencies.

Reference: Intelligence Authorization Act; Bill HR 5020 resolution H RES 774 ; vote number 2006-108 on Apr 26, 2006

http://www.ontheissues.org/Hou…

Voted YES on making the PATRIOT Act permanent.

To extend and modify authorities needed to combat terrorism, and for other purposes, including:

Assigning three judges to hear individuals’ petitions concerning improper requests by the FBI for library circulation records, library patron lists, book sales records, book customer lists, and other records

Reporting every year the number of library records orders that are granted, modified, or denied

Allows Internet service providers to disclose their subscribers information and the contents of their communications to a government entity, if they believe there is “immediate danger of death or serious physical injury”

Requires that any court that allows a “roving wiretap” under the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) must describe in great detail the intended target whose identity is not known

Allows individuals and businesses to seek legal counsel if they have received a National Security Letter from the FBI requiring them to disclose financial information and records

Reference: USA PATRIOT and Terrorism Prevention Reauthorization Act; Bill HR 3199 ; vote number 2005-627 on Dec 14, 2005

Ed Whitfield will constantly fight against any real Progress in this country. His votes along the line bear it out. He does not share the values of Kentucky’s First Congressional District, and does not live among us.

Luckily, we have an awosome candidate in Heather Ryan, we just need the resources to get our message, and Whitfield’s record out to the voters. Visit Heather’s site here:

Please consider supporting our drive to oust Exxon Eddie, who as you can see clearly needs to be sent packing.

Please join our campaign for change in Western Kentucky here:

http://www.ryanforkentucky.com/

Please help bring that change about here:

http://www.actblue.com/page/am…

Anyone contributing on the Americans for Ryan page by May 20 will be entered in a drawing to win two pinback buttons from the 1960 campaign of JFK.

Best wishes everyone!!

 

Ivory Tower Meets The Campaign Stump

Crossposted from www.eyesontrade.org.

Once, many of the issues we talk about on this blog were discussed mostly among Rust Belt labor unions or in street demonstrations. But tough questions are increasingly being asked in a variety of places, from the ivory tower to the campaign stump… and in both instances, the focus is on a change in the rules of globalization, rather than perpetuating the stale debate about whether “yes” or whether “no” on globalization. Witness Harvard's Dani Rodrik's new paper, articulating what he says is now the “new orthodoxy” on trade:

We can talk of a new conventional wisdom that has begun to emerge within multilateral institutions and among Northern academics. This new orthodoxy emphasizes that reaping the benefits of trade and financial globalization requires better domestic institutions, essentially improved safety nets in rich countries and improved governance in the poor countries.

Rodrik goes on to push this new orthodoxy further, articulating what he calls his “policy space” approach, allowing countries to negotiate around opting-in and opting-out more easily of international rules and schemes as their development and domestic needs merit. Citing the controversy around NAFTA's investor-state mechanism and the WTO's challenge of Europe's precautionary approach in consumer affairs, Rodrik poses the following challenge to the orthodoxy:

Globalization is a hot button issue in the advanced countries not just because it hits some people in their pocket book; it is controversial because it raises difficult questions about whether its outcomes are “right” or “fair.” That is why addressing the globalization backlash purely through compensation and income transfers is likely to fall short. Globalization also needs new rules that are more consistent with prevailing conceptions of procedural fairness.

And this focus on a change of rules hit the political arena today, with a major policy speech by former Sen. John Edwards (D-N.C.). See here. Among the important points, that thus far are only being articulated by Edwards among the top candidates:

* For years now, Washington has been passing trade deal after trade deal that works great for multinational corporations, but not for working Americans. For example, NAFTA and the WTO provide unique rights for foreign companies whose profits are allegedly hurt by environmental and health regulations. These foreign companies have used them to demand compensation for laws against toxins, mad cow disease, and gambling – they have even sued the Canadian postal service for being a monopoly. Domestic companies would get laughed out of court if they tried this, but foreign investors can assert these special rights in secretive panels that operate outside our system of laws.

*The trade policies of President Bush have devastated towns and communities all across America. But let's be clear about something – this isn't just his doing. For far too long, presidents from both parties have entered into trade agreements, agreements like NAFTA, promising that they would create millions of new jobs and enrich communities. Instead, too many of these agreements have cost us jobs and devastated many of our towns.

*NAFTA was written by insiders in all three countries, and it served their interests – not the interests of regular workers. It included unprecedented rights for corporate investors, but no labor or environmental protections in its core text. And over the past 15 years, we have seen growing income inequality in the U.S., Mexico and Canada.

*Today, our trade agreements are negotiated behind closed doors. The multinationals get their say, but when one goes to Congress it gets an up or down vote – no amendments are allowed. No wonder that corporations get unique protections, while workers don't benefit. That's wrong.

So, our movement has made real progress when things like Chapter 11, Fast Track and the precautionary principle are even being discussed by politicians and academics in the context of trade policy debates. And hopefully Edwards' raising of these issues will put pressure on the other candidates to follow suit. In the meantime, you can help turn the nice words into action by clicking here.

Trading Away our Food Safety

 

What’s for dinner?

 

  • Fruit and Veggies laced with pesticides?
  • Oysters tainted with Listeria?
  • Shrimp sautéed with Salmonella?
  • Spinach with a side of E. coli?
  • Just plain filthy fish? 

 

Hungry yet? In the last couple months, I know many of us have thought twice while picking our food for our families at the supermarket, and we should. The CDC estimates that 76 million Americans suffer from foodborne illnesses every year, 325,000 are hospitalized, and 5,000 die.

 

While the mainstream media is happy to tell the public of the great threats to their health and safety, scaring them stiff into watching the evening news, they rarely ask why the flood of dangerous imports is happening and of our leaders, what can be done to stop it.

 

 A new report by Public Citizen’s Global Trade Watch offers an answer to those questions. The report called “Trade Deficit in Food Safety: Proposed NAFTA Expansions Replicate Limits on U.S. Food Safety Policy that Are Contributing to Unsafe Food Imports” draws the link between the Bush administration’s damaging trade policies and our food safety problems.

 

Our food imports have increased sharply, almost doubling in value, since NAFTA and the WTO passed in the mid-‘90s. Seafood imports alone have increased 65 percent. For the first time in 2005, the United  States, formerly known as the world’s bread basket, became a net food importer, with a food deficit of nearly $370 million. 

 

There may not be anything inherently wrong with increasing the food imports into our country, but there is something inherently dangerous about doing so when our ability to inspect those imports is decreasing even more sharply than our increase in imports. In 1992, the FDA inspected 8% of all the food imports under its jurisdiction. In 2006, the inspection rate is now less than one percent, a staggering .6%.

 

NAFTA started this trend, and the Bush administration’s policy of free-trade-at-any-cost has made it worse. Under Bush, the U.S. has already expanded NAFTA to Central America and is now pushing for passage of NAFTA-expansion deals to Peru, Panama, Colombia, and South Korea. 

 

The real problem is that these so-called “trade” agreements do more than increase trade of goods between nations. Trade rules incorporated into the proposed FTAs with Peru, Panama, Colombia and South Korea limit food safety standards and border inspection. The agreements require the United  States to rely on foreign regulatory structures and foreign safety inspectors to ensure that food imports are safe. The agreements require that the U.S. food safety regulators treat imported food the same as domestically produced food, even though more intensive inspection of imported goods is needed to compensate for often weak domestic regulatory systems in some exporting nations.

 

Last November, Democrats won a much-needed and much-deserved majority in Congress, and trade issues played no small part in helping usher in new leadership. 37 supporters of our failed trade policy lost their seats to Democrats campaigning on fair trade. The food safety issue is just one aspect of the Bush administration’s trade policy that has hurt Americans, but it’s also an issue that Democrats can start fixing right now to make a real difference in people’s lives. While several Democratic leaders have proposed legislation to help mend our food safety regulatory system, none of those steps will suffice if our leaders keep passing these Bush administration trade deals. The first step that Democrats can take is to vote “no” to NAFTA expansions to Peru, Panama, Colombia, and South Korea. 

 

To read the report, sign a petition or find out what you can do to protect yourself from dangerous imports visit http://www.citizen.org/trade/food/ or read our blog, http://www.eyesontrade.org for continuing coverage of the unsafe food import crisis.