Lou Dobbs of CNN is apparently doing a week-long series on CAFTA. He interviewed Rep. Charlie Rangel on Monday who's against CAFTA, and Rep. Kevin Brady last night who is for it. Here is the transcript, which has some interesting information on CAFTA and NAFTA. It also really encapsulates many of the arguments for and against CAFTA. Enjoy!
P.S. I'm hoping that the info and articles I send on trade and CAFTA issues are helpful. Please let me know if anyone begins to find them annoying.
-Rachel
LOU DOBBS TONIGHT; CNNfn
8,696 words
25 May 2004
CNN: Lou Dobbs Tonight
English
(c) 2004 FDCH / eMedia, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Still ahead, a controversial new trade agreement tonight, closer to becoming reality. We`ll report on who stands to gain and lose from CAFTA next. We`ll have some of your thoughts on free trade and its high price and one of CAFTA`S biggest supporters, Congressman Kevin Brady joins us.
In "Exporting America," victory tonight for thousands of Americans who feared they would lose their jobs to cheap foreign labor markets.
And an interesting display of leadership by a large American corporation. And flood waters in the Midwest rise to the highest levels in years. More storms are now on the way.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
DOBBS: We are reporting all this week on the controversial Central American Free Trade Agreement. The United States is expected to sign CAFTA this Friday. But Congress must eventually approve it if it is to go into effect and lobby groups on both sides of the CAFTA debate are now pressing their cases. Lisa Sylvester reports from Washington.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
LISA SYLVESTER, CNN CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): CAFTA will not be kind to sugar beet farmers in North Dakota. The trade agreement will send more than 100,000 metric tons of sugar into the United States the first year. North Carolina textile workers are bracing for more jobs to ship to central America. Large modern textile plants are already dotting the landscape like this one in Honduras. An American family farm hammered by NAFTA expects to take a similar hit under CAFTA.
KATHERINE OZER, NATIONAL FAMILY FARM COALITION: What we see is people thinking that it`s been good in the U.S. and it`s been bad in other countries. We really feel like for family farmers it`s been bad all around.
JIM SCHOLLAERT, AMERICAN MANUF. TRADE ACTION COALITION: This is not about purchasing American products, exporting American products. It`s about exporting American jobs and American wealth.
SYLVESTER: Critics of NAFTA say you don`t need a crystal ball to see what will happen. Just look to the effects of ten years under NAFTA. In 1994, the United States had a trade surplus of more than $1 billion with Mexico. Now, it`s running a trade deficit of more than $40 billion. The United States lost nearly 900,000 jobs due to the trade deficit between the two countries during that time period, and the U.S. agricultural trade surplus fell 47 percent between 1994 and 2000. Those who benefited from NAFTA will also reap the rewards of CAFTA, multinational corporations, agri business, even countries like China that will be allowed to ship fiber and other fabric components to Central America for assembly. Supporters of CAFTA argue without the trade agreement, Central America will be left behind by globalization.
ERIK AUTOR, NATIONAL RETAIL FEDERATION: If Congress says we don`t want you to do business in Central America, by opposing CAFTA, they`re basically saying we want you to move to Asia.
SYLVESTER: But under NAFTA Mexicans were not necessarily better off. Wages fell, farmers were displaced.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
SYLVESTER: What has family farmers, small business owners and labor groups even more concerned than CAFTA is the Free Trade Area of the Americas, that`s a free trade agreement that is being negotiated that would extend to almost all of Latin America -- Lou.
DOBBS: Lisa, thank you very much. Lisa Sylvester reporting from Washington.
My next guest is spearheading congressional support for the Central American Free Trade Agreement. Congressman Kevin Brady says CAFTA will bring new jobs to this country. Congressman Brady is a member House ways and means committee joining us tonight from his district in Houston, Texas. Congressman, good to have you with us.
REP. KEVIN BRADY (R), TEXAS: Good evening, Lou. Thanks for having me.
DOBBS: CAFTA is by most of our sources suggesting very clearly that it is not going to become law, said it will not be passed by Congress this election year. Do you think it will next?
BRADY: Well, yes, I do. In fact, I`m absolutely confident of it. Mainly because this is a three for one win for America. One, we open up an emerging new market about the size of Canada to American goods and services especially for American farmers. We trade a partnership that will allow us to compete better against the likes of China. Thirdly, we lock in some dramatic reforms in Central America and democracy and labor rights, environmental rights. To their credit they`ve come so far. We need to make sure we keep them on the road.
DOBBS: Congressman, you just heard Lisa Sylvester`s report. The statistics are straightforward. 900,000 American jobs lost as a result of NAFTA. For Mexico, a decline overall in their wages since the NAFTA treaty was enacted in 1993 to 2003. Manufacturing wages in Mexico in decline. A trade deficit that has exploded on the part of the United States, $40 billion with Mexico. How in the world can this kind of result of something called free trade be beneficial to the United States and why would we want to do any more of it?
BRADY: First, those facts are not straightforward. They are very slanted. I think they ignore the devaluation of the peso and the worldwide recession that hit most of Mexico and the world in the early 1990s. The fact is unemployment is lower than it was before NAFTA. Mexico is selling more to us. We`re selling twice as much to Mexico. And our manufacturing wages grew at twice the rate it did in America during NAFTA than before.
Let me tell you this. Let`s talk about the trade deficit. You`ve analyzed numbers. You know our problem with the trade deficit isn`t that we`re buying too many foreign goods. It`s that we`re selling too few American goods. It is not enough to just buy American. We have to sell American, our farm equipment, our computers, our accounting services. The trade agreements, basically tear down the "American need not apply" signs around the world and give us a chance to compete.
DOBBS: Congressman, I think that`s a wonderful idea. I don`t imagine there`s a single person in this country who wouldn`t agree with the statement we should be selling more. But here are the facts. We`re not. We have a $40 billion trade deficit with Mexico. We have a half trillion dollar trade deficit worldwide. We haven`t run a trade surplus in this country for 28 years. We continue to hear all of this talk about free trade, and the Bush administration and much of the Republican party keeps trying to suggest to the American people who are concerned about the impact on working families, upon this economy and the indebtedness for our children, that there are only two choices, something called free trade, which we all know, first of all, doesn`t exist and something called economic isolationism which we all know no one is proposing. Is there not a more intelligent approach to this kind of trade initiative?
BRADY: Actually, I think the Central America Free Trade Agreement is that balance. We are opening the market to an emerging area. They`ve been a proven trading partner over the years. They`ve bought -- for every dollar they sell into America, they`ve bought back $1.36. This is a great trade agreement for us. But again, going back to the trade deficit, yes, America is a huge consumer, and, yes, the rest of the world wants to invest in the country, a big part of our trade deficit. But the fact is when U.S. companies go out to compete, including SBC Communications , who has been negotiating a strike, what they find is that Europe and Asia and other regions have beat us to the punch. That their sales and their products are covered by free trade agreements. We want a level playing field for American companies. We want our workers to compete around the world. And so without these trade agreements -- and I can just tell you, in Central America we`re going to sell just almost immediately $900 million of AG products to Central America. That means a lot to U.S. workers.
DOBBS: Congressman, we thank you very much for being here. I hope you`ll come back as we continue to discuss CAFTA and its economic impact. Thank you. Congressman Kevin Brady of Texas.
Let`s take a look now at some of your thoughts. David in Victorville, California wrote in to say, "Lou, I love how you speak up for Americans and the working class and look out for us, unlike our politicians who are taxing us to death, putting us in debt ...giving our country and jobs away to illegal aliens and other countries on a silver platter." Well, maybe not exactly a silver platter.
And M.W. Dies, "Lou, while we may need free trade, we don`t need one-sided agreements which only expedite the transfer of American jobs. Many of the past free trade agreements have not really been about what`s good for the consumer, but rather what`s good for certain special interest groups."
And David Babcock of Hackensack, New Jersey. "Lou, your coverage of free trade agreements shows that they are anything but free."
And Roberta Sweet in Campbell, New York. "Lou, whatever happened to the government of the people, by the people, for the people?" We think that`s a pretty good question here.
