Editorial Boards Across the Country Continue Drumbeat to Pass the Colombia FTA
The New York Times editorial: “Pass the Colombian Trade Pact …We don’t say it all that often, but President Bush is right: Congress should pass the Colombian free-trade agreement now. Mr. Bush signed the deal two years ago. The Democratic majority in Congress has refused to approve it out of a legitimate concern over the state of human rights in
and less legitimate desires to pander to organized labor or deny Mr. Bush a foreign policy win.” (11/18/08)
Los Angeles Times editorial: “Seal the deal on Colombian trade pact… The Colombia Free Trade Agreement is once again a political football in
Washington . Almost as soon as Barack Obama won the election, it came into play. Now it is being punted, fumbled, spiked and maybe even hurled in a desperate Hail Mary pass to Congress as its chief supporter, President Bush, prepares to leave office. Resistance to the pact by labor unions and human rights organizations, both here and in
, remains stiff. And with an incoming Democratic administration, the deal faces significant new obstacles. But the gamesmanship between Democrats and Republicans, unions and rights groups should not obscure one fact: The agreement is good for and good for the
.” (11/12/08)
The Wall Street Journal editorial: “Obama's Lame Duck Opportunity…House Speaker Nancy Pelosi yesterday announced plans for a lame duck session of Congress to bail out the
Detroit car makers. The transformation of the once-great auto industry into a national transportation utility is underway. If President Bush is going to sign this bailout, he should at least insist on a vote on the outstanding free trade agreements with , and .” (11/12/08)
The Oregonian editorial: “Keep the faith with
. … It would be foolish for Democrats in Congress, along with President-elect Barack Obama, to block the free-trade arrangement struck two years ago by the governments of the and
. Doing so would do more harm than good to
's credibility, not to mention its balance of trade. Yet Democrats seem unlikely to accept the deal, at least not before President Bush leaves office. … The , and especially a trade-dependent state like Oregon, which sent more than $27 million in goods to last year, should welcome an improvement in the climate for selling goods to
. And it should reward a friendly, effective government in for its support for American interests in
South America .” (11/22/08)
Dallas Morning News editorial: “Pass the
free trade pact. … Time is running out on a fast-tracked
free trade agreement, largely because of pre-election stalling tactics by congressional opponents. … Congress has a simple choice: Nurture a partnership that already is showing concrete and sustained results, or dump our most productive South American alliance into the deep freeze. The latter, really, is not an option. It's time to pass the
free trade agreement.” (11/20/08)
The
South Carolina
State editorial: “Congress should pass Colombian Free Trade pact. … WHAT DO The New York Times, The Wall Street Journal, The Washington Post and The Los Angeles Times all have in common? They all agree with The State: All say Congress should pass the Colombian Free Trade Agreement. ‘Pass the Pact,’ says The Post. ‘Seal the deal,’ says the L.A. Times. The Journal says the pact offers President-elect Barack Obama a ‘Lame Duck Opportunity’ — tell Congress to agree to a deal with President Bush to link a Detroit bailout to passage of this and other free trade agreements before the end of the year: ‘ business and the rest of the world would applaud.... President Bush could do the heavy lifting.’ The president-elect, and congressional Democrats, are perfectly free to re-examine their positions on this issue. They should do so, and listen to the many independent voices that say they should pass this pact now.” (11/21/08)
San Antonio Express editorial: “F
ree trade pact merits passage. … The Colombian trade pact deserves an up or down vote on its own merits. Forget the horse-trading — the
would benefit economically from passage of the agreement. … House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid have successfully blocked the progress of free trade agreements with
and other nations at the behest of labor unions. … A free trade agreement would immediately perk up
exports and level the playing field. That alone makes non-passage a self-inflicted economic wound. … Congress should pass a measure that is good for the and recognizes the progress made on labor rights in
.” (11/20/08)
Orlando Sentinel editorial: “Congress can create jobs by passing a free-trade deal with
. … A quarter of exports to come from
Florida . Information technology, aerospace equipment, medical devices and machinery are among the top products. The flow of these and other goods, and the jobs they support, would increase if a deal is approved. Passage of the deal also would strengthen ties with , a counterweight to the anti-American bloc in the region led by
. Spurning a friend such as would send a terrible message to other
allies. … The trade agreement with includes virtually the same labor and environmental protections as one with
that Congress passed last year. With lawmakers more eager than ever to boost the economy, there's no good reason for them to keep sitting on the deal.” (11/19/08)
The
Detroit News editorial: “Approving trade pacts would create jobs. … One of the best things the lame duck Congress could do to create jobs is to approve pending free trade agreements that it has failed to vote on. The most immediate benefits would flow by approving a free trade pact with
. More than 90 percent of the goods from the South American country already enter the
without paying a tariff. Approving the pact would remove duties as high as 35 percent on some American goods and over time eliminate tariffs on all American products. This removal of trade barriers encourages an increase in the sales of goods such as United Auto Workers-made Caterpillar trucks. … More important for
Michigan , it would reduce barriers on automotive products. It reduces tariffs and sales taxes on American cars, simplifies the tax code on vehicles and creates a working group to deal with continuing disputes on automotive trade. … Democrats, who control the U.S. Senate and House, have complained that
suffers from a bad international image. Nothing helps build international goodwill and create American jobs like free trade. Congress should quit playing procedural games. Free trade agreements should be approved or rejected on their merits. Passing these trade accords would remove obstacles to exports and increase jobs during a downturn.” (11/18/08)
Miami Herald editorial: “Obama, Democrats should support deal with close ally. … Lawmakers in Congress should rethink their own refusal to finalize the pending trade agreement with the strongest ally in
South America . When House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and her Democratic colleagues voted to put the deal on ice back in April, Rep. Rahm Emanuel suggested that a vote was still possible before the end of the year. … The advantage for the
is that it levels the playing field. products sold in currently pay tariffs of up to 35 percent, while practically all of
's goods enter this country duty-free, thanks to existing trade law.” (11/17/08)
Honolulu Star-Bulletin editorial: “Congress should ratify
trade agreement. … More than 90 percent of Colombian goods now arrive tariff-free in the while American exporters to
pay tariffs averaging 14 percent and as much as 35 percent. Under the agreement, 80 percent of products entering
would immediately be tariff-free, with the remainder achieving that treatment within 10 years. … If Pelosi continues to block the the agreement at the House entrance, Obama should take a closer look and consider its merit.” (11/13/08)
Longview (WA) Daily News editorial: “Trade pact with Colombia would benefit the
… Someone needs to help congressional Democrats recognize the many ways in which international trade stimulates the economy. … The fact is, this U.S.-Colombian Free Trade Agreement could deliver a timely boost to the national economy. Indeed, there is absolutely no downside for
businesses or workers. The
is the net beneficiary in the trade pact. already sells nearly all of its products to the
duty-free. Conversely, products sold to
are subject to tariffs of up to 35 percent for non-agricultural goods and higher for agricultural exports. The trade agreement would eliminate more than 80 percent of those tariffs. … Congressional Democrats may see a political benefit in opposing this and other trade agreements, but there is no economic benefit to be derived from refusing to tear down barriers to trade. … The U.S.-Colombian Free Trade Agreement would amount to an economic stimulus for both
Washington and the nation as a whole.” (11/13/08)
###