|
 |
 |
|
Soon after his inauguration in January, George W. Bush vowed that at his first meeting as president with the hemisphere's chiefs of state at the April Summit of the Americas in Quebec he would have in hand authorization from Congress to negotiate trade pacts through the "fast track" process — by which Congress can vote up or down a treaty negotiated by the administration with another country but not amend it.
Though well intentioned, this pledge turned out to be somewhat reckless. Less than three months in the White House proved to be too short a time to get the congressional process moving towards seeking approval of the measure that is considered an indispensable tool for negotiating trade agreements. Indeed, at the six-month mark the Bush administration is still maneuvering to get Congress to consider fast track authority — renamed "trade promotion authority" by the administration but still referred to as fast track.
Although the fast track process would be applicable to any country in the world, in view of President Bush's significant personal interest and commitment to developing more meaningful ties with the nations in the hemisphere, it is Latin American countries that the administration is more anxious to approach with this negotiating process.
U.S. Trade Representative Robert Zoellick, the administration's point man on fast track, is an able negotiator with sound experience in dealing with lawmakers, but Congress has gone into its August recess without any indication of when it may move towards considering the necessary legislation. Late in July, Republican Dennis Hastert. the House of Representatives speaker, said he would push for a vote on fast track before the August recess, but early this months Dick Armey, the Republican House leader, conceded that despite concerted efforts he did not have enough voters to pass the measure before the recess.
The Bush administration hoped that the narrowing U.S trade deficit, which has been shrinking this year as a result a drop in imports caused by the domestic economic slowdown, would make it easier to push for fast track authority. But a survey of House legislators by the Congress Daily newsletter found only three Democrats who would publicly support the Republican fast track proposal. And even Republican support for the measure is somewhat soft.
There are others, but one important factor explaining the congressional mood is that the U.S. economic downturn has increased organized labor's opposition to anything they perceive as having the potential of affecting their wages and jobs. Lawmakers of both parties — more Democrats, however, than Republicans — are reluctant to do anything that might offend the labor-backed vote.
Just last week the Senate approved stringent safety requirements on Mexican trucks seeking access to American highways yesterday, brushing aside strong objections from the Bush administration that the rules discriminate against Mexico in violation of the 1993 North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) and could undermine efforts to improve trade and other relations with the neighboring country.
The Senate tried to frame the debate around issues of public safety — charging vehicle maintenance and driver training in Mexico were below U.S. standards, an allegation disputed by experts on both sides of the border — but what counted most was the lobbying effort led by the Teamsters, the 1.4-million-member union that represents most of the nation's truckers, which sees jobs being taken away from them by lower-paid, nonunionized Mexican drivers.
The Senate vote, coupled with earlier House approval of a more stringent proposal calling for a ban on Mexican trucking beyond the 20-mile zone, seriously threatened Bush's plans to open the border to more U.S.-Mexican commerce and casts further doubt over his effort to win congressional approval of fast track authority.
With the House having taken an even tougher position than the Senate on the Mexican trucking issue, it will be difficult to arrive at a House-Senate compromise that would satisfy Bush. White House advisers have said they would recommend a veto of both the House and Senate versions.
While Democrats' main reason for obstructing the U.S. opening to trade with Latin American countries is their concern with labor's support, some Republicans do the same thing in the name of defending local industries.
It took six years to prepare and approve May last year a law aimed at reducing the impact of the NAFTA on the smaller Central American countries south of Mexico and in the Caribbean by eliminating tariffs for garments made with U.S. fabric and thread, and help prepare the region to compete against the growing Asian garment industry. But a delay in the implementation of the law has caused the loss of thousands of jobs in Central America and the Caribbean. Primarily responsible for the delay is North Carolina's Republican Senator Jesse Helms, who is demanding that the U.S. Customs Service eliminate a regulation that allows U.S. fabric used in Caribbean-made garments to be dyed and finished in those countries. Until Customs reconsiders this regulation that Helms claims will cost his state 4,000 jobs, he promises to hold up confirmation of Treasury Department officials.
While overturning a law to accommodate these workers seems to ignore the fact that U.S. participation in the global garment industry is fading, observers note that it contradicts the free trade doctrine in Bush's foreign policy. "It seems to us contrary to the general free trade stance that the Republican government has and continues to hold," said Honduran Ambassador Hugo Noe Pino.
'It does undermine the credibility of the U.S. going into a trade agreement showing that we do have difficulty implementing" earlier accords, said John Murphy, vice president for Western Hemisphere affairs at the U.S Chamber of Commerce.
The way it looks, Congress will resolve this issue in its own way, by not approving the measure that would allow new trade pacts to be negotiated by the U.S.
Claudio Campuzano (claudio-campuzano@hotmail.com) is U.S, correspondent for the Latin American newsweekly Tiempos del Mundo and editorial page editor of the New York daily Noticias del Mundo. He writes weekly for World Tribune.com