Tapsearch Com EditorSelling out U.S. Workers part 2 - Fast Track
July 26th 2008 18:47
Bizarre Politics Reports:
Fast Track outside the will of the people
By Ray Tapajna - Published letter by Karen Armstrong which appeared at the same time as ours 11 years ago and it too still applys today - noted in our last post.
" Fast Track" without the consent of the people
(President Clinton failed to get "Fast Track" passed during his time but President Bush got it passed while the eyes of the people were focused on his pre-emptive war with Iraq.)
Government without representation
" I read " Fast track needed to reduce chances of a U.S. recession" (Forum , Nov 3, '97 ), with interest. Although, I respect his credentials, I have to disagree with Robert P O'Quinn's conclusions. O'Quinn stated that the president needed fast-track trade negotiation authority to "minimize the potential damge to the U.S. economy from the Asian crisis," and so that NAFTA could be expanded throughout Latin America and to Asia in a singular agreement.
I believe that Congress should oppose fast track for two major reasons. First, it is undemocratic. It doesn't allow our representatives - and, therefore, us - to have a say in how agreements are shaped. Second, there is much evidence that current agreements, such as NAFTA, have been detrimental to wrokers, the poor and the environment. Clearly, we must find a new format for trade agreements that will protect the rights of workers and the well-being of the majority - and especially the poor.
Recently, Rep. Sherrod Brown ( Now a Senator ), traveled to Mexico and witnessed the effects of NAFTA on Mexican workers. He related stories of the people he met to fellow House members. The following is excerpted from the Congressional Record:
" NAFTA has failed utterly to keep its promises to Rafael and Felicia and Ritas and thousands of Mexican workers. They have no affective representation in the workplace. NAFTA has failed to keep its promises to thousands of working American families. They cannot compete for $1 an hour. And it has failed to keep its promise of a cleaner environment, The border is a disaster area of polluted water and chemical poisons."
( Note Al Gore was Vice President during these times and said nothing. In addition none of this stopped the vast migration of workers from Mexico seeking economic survival competing for the last rung on the economic ladder in the USA while U.S. workers are getting jobs one day at a time. -- now even temporary workers are being cut out of the picture. )
Note that the same applys today - very little has changed since Karen Armstrong of Medina, Ohio, wrote this letter except for the fact that Vice President Al Gore won the Nobel Peace Prize while the pollutted waters and chemical poisons still remain from the time he served as Vice President. When will he and other environmentalist include free trade and globalization as the major assault on our ecology systems especially when long haul ocean, truck, rail and air shipping is required for the global economic arena .
" Fast Track" without the consent of the people
(President Clinton failed to get "Fast Track" passed during his time but President Bush got it passed while the eyes of the people were focused on his pre-emptive war with Iraq.)
Government without representation
" I read " Fast track needed to reduce chances of a U.S. recession" (Forum , Nov 3, '97 ), with interest. Although, I respect his credentials, I have to disagree with Robert P O'Quinn's conclusions. O'Quinn stated that the president needed fast-track trade negotiation authority to "minimize the potential damge to the U.S. economy from the Asian crisis," and so that NAFTA could be expanded throughout Latin America and to Asia in a singular agreement.
I believe that Congress should oppose fast track for two major reasons. First, it is undemocratic. It doesn't allow our representatives - and, therefore, us - to have a say in how agreements are shaped. Second, there is much evidence that current agreements, such as NAFTA, have been detrimental to wrokers, the poor and the environment. Clearly, we must find a new format for trade agreements that will protect the rights of workers and the well-being of the majority - and especially the poor.
Recently, Rep. Sherrod Brown ( Now a Senator ), traveled to Mexico and witnessed the effects of NAFTA on Mexican workers. He related stories of the people he met to fellow House members. The following is excerpted from the Congressional Record:
" NAFTA has failed utterly to keep its promises to Rafael and Felicia and Ritas and thousands of Mexican workers. They have no affective representation in the workplace. NAFTA has failed to keep its promises to thousands of working American families. They cannot compete for $1 an hour. And it has failed to keep its promise of a cleaner environment, The border is a disaster area of polluted water and chemical poisons."
( Note Al Gore was Vice President during these times and said nothing. In addition none of this stopped the vast migration of workers from Mexico seeking economic survival competing for the last rung on the economic ladder in the USA while U.S. workers are getting jobs one day at a time. -- now even temporary workers are being cut out of the picture. )
Note that the same applys today - very little has changed since Karen Armstrong of Medina, Ohio, wrote this letter except for the fact that Vice President Al Gore won the Nobel Peace Prize while the pollutted waters and chemical poisons still remain from the time he served as Vice President. When will he and other environmentalist include free trade and globalization as the major assault on our ecology systems especially when long haul ocean, truck, rail and air shipping is required for the global economic arena .
| 47 |
| Vote |
Add To: 
subscribe to this blog
