Unfair Trade

For nearly 20 years, U.S. trade policy has focused on establishing “free trade” agreements with as many countries as possible.  These agreements have not produced the prosperity they promised, either in the United States or developing nations.  Instead, the United States has lost hundreds of thousands of good-paying jobs, and agricultural markets have been flooded with imports, reducing farm income.  For example, the 1993 North American Free Trade Agreement with Mexico and Canada sent the Mexican economy into a tailspin.  Cattle imports to the United States from both countries resulted in a net income loss to cattle producers during NAFTA’s first decade.  It has become clear that the purpose of the agreements is to enhance corporate power, not to build economies.  Support in Congress has been waning, and the Central America and Oman Free Trade Agreements barely passed.

Investor rights.  A little-understood feature of NAFTA and many other agreements gives investors (usually corporations) the right to challenge a nation’s laws if they might limit future profits.  Under this provision, secret trade tribunals can demand that countries abolish laws that protect their residents, and can assess huge fines for damages.  For instance, a tribunal found in favor of Metalclad Corporation, nullified local Mexican zoning laws to allow Metalclad to install a toxic waste dump in Puebla, and exacted a huge fine.  In a similar case, Methanex challenged California laws designed to keep toxic gas additive chemicals from polluting drinking water.  DRC has passed several county resolutions calling on the U.S. administration to remove these “investor rights” from existing and future trade agreements. Find out more details on "investor rights" and how NAFTA cases have turned out. To find out how to pass a resolution in your community, call DRC at 701-483-2851.

Worker rights.  Many U.S. trade partners deny workers the right to organize and allow forced labor conditions that border on slavery.  Senator Kent Conrad proposed an amendment to the Oman agreement to prevent that country from obtaining tariff reductions on goods manufactured under forced labor conditions, but the agreement passed without it.  Call your Senators and Representative to urge support for Senator Conrad’s measure and to defeat future trade agreements that don’t include it.  Contact your North Dakota Congressional leaders.

Peru.  The next free trade agreement on the Congressional agenda is with Peru.  Like NAFTA, it will result in lost American jobs, reduced income for American farmers, and loss of human rights in both countries.  We can expect the Peru agreement to reach Congress after the November 2006 elections in the “lame duck” session.  Tell your Senators and Representative in Congress to vote against it.

Trade Promotion Authority.  Presidential Trade Promotion Authority, or “fast-track,” is one reason Congress has passed so many “free trade” agreements.  Under “fast-track,” Congress has a very limited time to debate trade proposals and cannot amend them.  Most Congressional offices don’t even have time to read the extremely long text of the agreements.  Presidents Clinton and Bush have both had this authority, but Congress must vote in 2007 on whether to extend it.  Tell your Senators and Representative to vote no.

Join DRC.  You can help fight unfair U.S. trade policies by joining DRC.