Democrats' lose-lose strategy in Colombia

Houston Chronicle Editorial:

Rejection by the U.S. House of the free trade agreement with Colombia falls somewhere between tragedy and farce. Failure to adopt the agreement harms workers in both countries, but particularly the U.S. workers House Democrats claim to be helping.

The House voted 224-195 Thursday to end a rule that would have required it to vote on the trade agreement within 90 days. The procedural vote means the proposal probably will not be considered this year, and both Democratic presidential candidates, Sens. Barack Obama of Illinois and Hillary Clinton of New York, say they are leery of free trade agreements.

House Democrats are courting organized labor this election year, and unions in the United States generally oppose free trade agreements regardless of their benefits. Human rights activists argue that Congress should not approve the agreement because too many union members in Colombia are murdered.

Those who voted to reject the trade agreement were unaware of or ignored the fact that Colombian goods already enjoy broad access to U.S. markets. The trade agreement would have opened Colombia to U.S. exports. The agreement, in short, is indisputably to the advantage of U.S. companies and their employees. The treaty even includes the labor and environmental standards that Democrats say are necessary for free trade to be fair trade.

As to the charges that Colombia tolerates the murder of union members, the unions' own figures prove otherwise. Under Colombia's President Alvaro Uribe, union members are eight times less likely to be slain than members of the general population of that violence-prone country. And of the handful of union members slain recently, many were killed for motives other than their union membership.

The Colombian free trade agreement has fallen victim to selfish election-year politics. Democrats don't want to allow President Bush a victory, even if it is in the United States' best interest.

...

The Chronicle is a pretty liberal paper but they could not swallow the bogus arguments put forward by the Democrats on this issue. Too bad they want remember this come election time when those Democrats are running on this sorry record.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Should Republicans go ahead and add Supreme Court Justices to head off Democrats

Washington Post: Some Democrats eye adding more justices to the Supreme Court to change its ideological bent The once-remote idea has gained the attention of liberals angered by the GOP push to remake the federal courts. Probably the easy way to defeat this court-packing scheme is for Trump to propose doing the same thing now.  It would lead to Democrat denunciations and claims that it would be wrong, thereby blowing up any attempt by them in the unfortunate event of Democrats winning a presidential election.
Read more

29 % of companies say they are unlikely to keep insurance after Obamacare

Conn Carroll: A new survey of 368 midsize to large companies found that 29% of them are considering terminating their active employee health care plans when Obamacare is full implemented in 2014. Only 71% of employers surveyed said they did not expect to drop their health coverage, while 20% said they did not know and 9% said they were planning to exit. The latest survey, conducted by Towers Watson, echoes an ealier survey by McKinsey & Co. finding that 30% of private-sector employers were planning to drop their employee health insurance coverage by 2014. When the Congressional Budget Office crunched Obamacare's spending numbers, they estimated that only 7% of employees currently covered by employer-sponsored plans would lose their plans. ... This means the cost of the health care fiasco will be hundreds of billions more than estimated by the CBO and Congressional Democrat. It is also clear that Obama's pledge that you could keep your health care plan if you wanted t
Read more

Bin Laden's concern about Zarqawi's remains

James Robbins: ... Bin Laden suggests that President Bush should allow Zarqawi’s body to be returned to his family in Jordan, but this is a matter that is up to the Jordanian government, which so far has not shown much interest in facilitating a homecoming. Bin Laden mocks King Abdullah II, calling him a Coalition minion, and asking “w hat scares you about Abu Musab after he’s dead? You know that his funeral, if allowed to happen, would be a huge funeral showing the extent of sympathy with the mujahedin.” A large crowd would definitely turn out, though most people would be on hand to demonstrate their anger and disgust. Last November’s hotel bombings in Amman , masterminded by Zarqawi, are still fresh in people’s memory, and mentioning them to Jordanians has the same visceral impact as memory of the 9/11 attacks does here. Jordan has adopted a zero-tolerance policy towards those who choose to mourn the country’s least favorite son, and four opposition members of parliament who paid con
Read more