It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

POLITICS: Congress Approves CAFTA

page: 1
1

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 27 2005 @ 11:24 PM
link   
The Central American Free Trade Agreement was approved by the US House of Representatives with a 217 - 215 vote. Supporters of the agreement argued that it would help U.S. trade in Central America by eventually eliminating tariffs that make American products more expensive.
 



www.foxnews.com
WASHINGTON — The House narrowly approved the Central American Free Trade Agreement early Thursday, a personal triumph for President Bush, who campaigned aggressively for the accord he said would foster prosperity and democracy in the hemisphere.

The 217-215 vote just after midnight adds six Latin American countries to the growld have been a major political embarrassment for the Bush administration.

It was an uphill effort to win a majority, with Bush traveling to Capitol Hill earlier in the day to appeal to waveringed to a loss of well-paying American jobs and the soaring trade deficit.



Please visit the link provided for the complete story.


While this is being called a victory for the Bush administration, the fact that a single flipped vote would have led to a tie isn't exactly a ringing endorsement.

In any case, the agreement appears to be less controversial than its predecessor; no talk of "giant sucking sounds" this time around anyway.

[edit on 7/27/2005 by ChemicalLaser]




posted on Jul, 28 2005 @ 12:35 AM
link   
You missed some of the source in your edit, the second paragraph should read:



The 217-215 vote just after midnight adds six Latin American countries to the growing lists of nations with free trade agreements with the United States and averts what could have been a major political embarrassment for the Bush administration.


Anyway, I think it is a victory, passage wasn't certain and this is probably one of those cases where extra votes were available -- the voting was kept open to just get enough votes necessary and some Republicans were allowed to vote no to appease constituencies once it had passed.



posted on Jul, 28 2005 @ 12:42 AM
link   
Does anyone know if Puerto Rico is part of CAFTA?



posted on Jul, 28 2005 @ 12:45 AM
link   
Puerto Rico is part of the United States, so of course it already has no trade barriers between it and the U.S. and it will be covered by any treaty between the U.S. and foreign nations.

[edit on 7/28/2005 by djohnsto77]



posted on Jul, 28 2005 @ 08:37 AM
link   
Another sad day for America now more companies will move there for the cheap labor like they did to Mexico when NAFTA was approved. Not a good thing as I see it.



posted on Jul, 28 2005 @ 05:54 PM
link   

You missed some of the source in your edit, the second paragraph should read:


quote:
The 217-215 vote just after midnight adds six Latin American countries to the growing lists of nations with free trade agreements with the United States and averts what could have been a major political embarrassment for the Bush administration.



Drat. Sorry about that. Unfortunately, the time limit for editing has expired. Thanks for catching that.



[edit on 7/28/2005 by ChemicalLaser]



posted on Jul, 28 2005 @ 07:21 PM
link   
CAFTA would be considered a success, in my book, if it leads to Latin prosperity......of the nature that many Americans take for granted.

However, we did right the book on business strategy and we have a wonderful history of outstanding business ethic (Enron for an obvious hail), so I believe with the utmost of confidence that our own interests will be secured long before anyone else's.......which is the point.....right?



posted on Jul, 28 2005 @ 07:55 PM
link   
Mmm wonderful.. export even more of our jobs to foreign countries that will produce the same goods cheaper and sell them for the same price.


Sigh..



posted on Jul, 28 2005 @ 09:24 PM
link   
The upsides of CAFTA: it may lead to future economic prosperity for many Central American countries and reduce further immigration of the Central Americans to the US. We'll see about that.

The downsides of CAFTA: the US businesses would expect to export more production-based jobs and import cheap goods to the US. How would Americans get money to buy cheap goods when there aren't many jobs in the US to earn money?
This would mean the US economy will end up as a third world economy within a decade or two and create a massive welfare society with service-based industries.


The worst part of CAFTA? The dietary supplements (vitamins, performance materials, herbal products) would be severely restricted. Wanna Vitamin C and that bin of protein powder? Get a doctor's prescription first.



[edit on 7/28/2005 by the_oleneo]



posted on Jul, 29 2005 @ 11:45 AM
link   
OK, I screwed up and posted this query to the "PTS Senate sells out American Public for CAFTA " not seeing this thread soon enough, my bad.

Anyone know where "The CAFTA Law" is posted in its entirety?

So places that sell vitamins, protein tablets, and other .... well screw that, so I gotta pay out the nose just to persuade the doc that protein tablets and vitamins are good for me. Are we really supposed to believe that this will be enforced south of the border? Nope, they're exempt, never mind the CAFTA Law. US Citizens will have to obey; and we're supposed to believe that the Neuvo Laredo Police Department will enforce the CAFTA Law at the Pharmicias? We've been had.

What if I need preparation H? Must I go thru CAFTA to get it? Looks like a lot of people will be needing Preparation H when CAFTA enforcement begins. Drop yo drawers and bend over!



posted on Jul, 29 2005 @ 11:58 PM
link   
.
MemoryShock,

did you benefit from Enron?

I sure didn't.

Californians got gouged by energy market price manipulations.

Employees of Enron, saw their life savings evaporate to dust in the wind.

But we can all be glad Ken Lay was helping Dick Cheney determine our energy policy in secret meetings.

That must be why the latest energy bill gives benefits to the oil companies while they are making record profits.

If it comes from Washington, it is guaranteed NOT to be in the best interest of average Americans.

It ain't good for working people in any country.
It ain't good for Americans.

It does help the ultra-rich get ultra-richer.

CAFTA & Pharmaceuticals
.



posted on Jul, 30 2005 @ 12:48 PM
link   
Slank......I chose Enron for its obvious negative connotation. My post was intended with a sarcastic tone......

I agree with you.



posted on Oct, 8 2005 @ 07:00 PM
link   
Hi, anyone know if there is a tabulation or chart anywhere that is tracking the number of U.S. jobs being lost per month (or running total) due to CAFTA?

According to my congressman (reply to a letter I sent him asking him to vote NO) CAFTA will "create more jobs than it destroys." Except.... NOBODY has any idea what those jobs are! Just like offshoring, the "replacement jobs" in the U.S. were supposed to be Nano-technology; but those jobs wound up going to Tata of India. The real jobs created due to offshoring are flipping burgers at McDonalds.

So will Dept of Labor (or whoever) take the number of jobs lost because of CAFTA and reduce that figure by the number of hires in the fast food industry (in order to rationalize)?

Thanks for all the hard work being accomplished on ATS forums. Thanks, in advance, for your wisdom.

Adonsa



posted on Oct, 8 2005 @ 09:21 PM
link   
myomyomy. Good grief. This one slipped right by me.

Bush does deliver. It's a Bushkreig.

What's next I wonder.


Some background:
US Brokers Continental Corporate Takeover


And for those of you worried about Mexican illegals crossing the Rio Grande to steal American jobs...



.

[edit on 8-10-2005 by soficrow]




top topics



 
1

log in

join