|
Comment on this article |
Email this Article
|
|
News :: Agriculture : Civil & Human Rights : Economy : Elections & Legislation : Environment : Globalization : Government Secrecy : Health : International Relations : Labor : Latin America : Political-Economy : Regime : Right Wing |
|
In Their Own Words: The House Debate on CAFTA |
Current rating: 0 |
by Liza Grandia
(No verified email address) |
01 Aug 2005
|
|
Thanks to C-Span, we citizens were able to witness live the late-night wrongdoings and dirty dealings of Tom DeLay and Company. Their manipulations of the CAFTA vote process made a mockery of our democracy. Contrary to their own Fast-Track legislation which designates 20 hours of debate on trade agreements, the Rules Committee limited debate for CAFTA to a mere two hours. That left exactly sixteen and a half seconds for each representative to voice his or her opinion on the most controversial trade agreement ever to pass before Congress. |
At almost midnight Wednesday, July 27, after holding the vote open forty-seven minutes past the official close, the Republican leadership arm-twisted out their 217th "aye" and the controversial Central America Free Trade Agreement (CAFTA) passed into law. Vice President Dick Cheney apparently spent his day in the shadows of House chambers offering pork deals in exchange for votes. It seems fitting that the astronomical sign on the Guatemalan Maya calendar for this ill-fated day was "Ajmaq," meaning a day of "sins" in which "the ancestors see your wrong-doings."
Thanks to C-Span, we citizens were able to witness live the late-night wrongdoings and dirty dealings of Tom DeLay and Company. Their manipulations of the CAFTA vote process made a mockery of our democracy. Contrary to their own Fast-Track legislation which designates 20 hours of debate on trade agreements, the Rules Committee limited debate for CAFTA to a mere two hours. That left exactly sixteen and a half seconds for each representative to voice his or her opinion on the most controversial trade agreement ever to pass before Congress.
The short debates were, indeed, great comedy-who needs reality TV when you can see it all on C-Span? My favorite moments of Republican ignorance, greed, evil, and sheer stupidity were (in that order):
* When Mike Pence from Indiana argued they should support CAFTA to help the "fledgling democracies" of Central America who have "send soldiers to stand with out soldiers in Operation Iraqi Freedom." Dear Mr. Pence, let me tell you that the reason why Central Americans are willing to die in Iraq is that they are bone poor and the U.S. offers them citizenship if they are lucky enough to live past their mercenary service.
* When Bill Thomas, a Republican from California, forthrightly admitted he was looking our for Big Business interests through CAFTA, saying: "Let us protect intellectual property rights, let us protect our exporters, let us protect the multinationals, let us protect the big farm corporations."
* Also amusing were the petulant calls for "fair trade" by Republicans bothered that agribusiness from their districts were not able to dump cheap corn (e.g. Rep. Ryan from Wisconsin) and factory-farmed chicken (e.g. Rep. Norwood of Georgia) on Central America. Haven't they a clue about the economic misery most Central Americans live in? "Breaking down barriers to trade" (their favorite mantra) between the richest country in the world and a region where most people make less than two dollars a day is not "fair trade" - it's economic slaughter. It's akin to Paris Hilton waltzing into a homeless shelter, stamping her foot and saying, "It's not fair they get free meals and I don't."
* Most hilarious were the multiple invocations of Fidel Castro, Hugo Chavez, the Sandinistas and even Che Guevara. Reps. Kolbe (Arizona), Everett (Alabama), Burton (Indiana), and Hoekstra (Michigan) reasoned that if these Commies were against CAFTA, then they should vote for it to save the U.S. from the red menace in Central America. Someone should explain to them the Cold War is long since over and take special care to inform Mr. Burton that Che Guevara was long ago assassinated by the CIA and can no longer pose a threat to U.S. trade.
Opposing CAFTA, there were the usual series of protectionist testimonies, for example, Mr. Howard Coble from North Carolina who pulled some tears about his textile-working mother. And there was, of course, Mr. Danny "Candyman" Davis of Illinois who used his precious minute to say, "I do not profess to know everything that CAFTA is going to do, but I do know thatÅ .[in my district[ we make candy. We make a lot of it. We used to be called the Candy Capital of the WorldÅ I was told and I was hoping that CAFTA would help reduce the price of sugar for my candy makers. It will not. Therefore, there is no reason for me to vote for CAFTA and I shall not." Fair enough, it's nice to see they are at least looking out for their constituents' interests over the pressures of corporate lobbyists. And, all that candy will definitely come in handy for Congressional representatives on their fact-finding missions to Central America to give out to the legions of new child beggars created by CAFTA.
It's hard to know whether to laugh or cry that our Congressional representatives had such a hasty and mistaken debate on a trade agreement that will have such great consequence for Central America. The evening became more grotesquely surreal when the Republican leadership moved merrily to the next order of business, a bill supporting the goals of "National Marina Day." Meanwhile, on CNN, "Larry King Live" was wasting yet more airtime on the 59-day search for the missing girl in Aruba.
Yet, despite general ignorance of what is really hidden in CAFTA's 2,400 pages, I did find a ray of hope in the very sophisticated speeches of a few representatives who have realized that these trade agreements are "outsourcing agreements" (Congresswoman Maxine Waters from California) and meant only to benefit "profit-hungry corporations." Mr. Dennis Kucinich rightly emphasized that "CAFTA is about institutionalizing cheap labor."
It was really Rep. Sam Farr from California, though, who stole the show with an insight from his Peace Corps days in South America: "The richest country in the world is about to enter into a trade agreement with the poorest countries in the Western hemisphere so that we can open up nontariff issues. They send us goods without tariffs. Yes, we do not grow bananas in the United States or guananaba or platano, but we want to send them our goods so that people who are earning $2 a day can buy Two Buck Chuck."
A decade after the Clinton administration began to spin the myths of "free trade" with NAFTA, we should be encouraged growing understanding among some of our Democratic lawmakers that these trade agreements are written by, of, and for the corporations. That is a welcome opening that must be deepened. In our fury at the Bush administration's underhanded tactics in passing CAFTA, let us not forget to mourn for the suffering the avalanche of CAFTA will wreck upon Central America. Then, let us get busy so that, never again, will a trade agreement vote be close enough to be stolen in broad moonlight.
Liza Grandia is an anthropologist who has lived and worked in Guatemala for more than six years. Her dissertation concerns the impacts of trade and globalization on the agrarian situation of the Q'eqchi' Maya people. |
See also:
http://www.commondreams.org
|
This work licensed under a
Creative Commons license |
