January 31, 2011
To: SPEEA
Council
From: SPEEA Legislative and Public Affairs Committee
Subject: Pre-Submitted New Business: Oppose Four Pending Trade Agreements
Background
Trade agreements with Korea, Colombia and Panama were
finalized near the end of the Bush administration. The Korea-US agreement was
modified in December 2010. All three may come to a vote in Congress early in
2011. The Obama administration is drafting a new agreement with 7 countries,
under the name Trans-Pacific Partnership.
These four agreements all conform to the NAFTA model by
Fundamentally, NAFTA-style trade agreements shift power
in favor of multinational companies. Corporate rights are placed above all
non-economic interests. This would be comparable to letting businesses in any
of the 50 states in America sue another state to be exempt from pollution
requirements, workplace safety or meat inspection rules. The result would be to
that each state's protections would drift down to the lowest common
denominator. This would be great for the businesses but would be bad for
people.
Congress is likely to consider the Korea-US agreement
first. The US International Trade Commission predicts the agreement would
increase exports to Korea. Unfortunately, imports into the US would increase
even more, with a net worsening of our trade balance.
The US ITC report predicts job losses in transportation
equipment (mostly automobiles), electronics, metal products, industrial
textiles such as Kevlar, and other high-tech industries with relatively high
wages. (The US ITC methodology assumes no jobs will be lost.) Other sectors of
the US domestic economy will do better - particularly agriculture, beef, pork,
wheat and soybeans.
The four trade agreements would allow foreign companies
to overturn local laws to protect the environment, human rights and public
health, by arguing that those laws reduce the future profits of a foreign
company. On the other hand, the agreements provides
very weak enforcement of labor rights.
The Korea-US agreement forbids mention of the Core Labor
Standards approved by the International Labor Organization. It also overturns
financial deregulation enacted in Korea. Korean products can have up to
two-thirds foreign content from China, or other low wage countries and be sold
in America duty-free. Korea could also include content
from the Kaesong Industrial
Complex, where North Koreans work under the management of South Korean
companies.
Specific objections
to the agreement with Colombia call out oppression of labor leaders. Panama has
a particular problem with laundering drug money and irregularities in financial
reporting.
Opposition also comes from American unions (except the
UAW), the AFL-CIO, State Labor Council's including Washington, the Korean Confederation
of Trade Unions, family farm organizations, local Korean community
organizations, and hundreds of faith-based and social justice groups.
Motion
It is moved that: THE SPEEA Council opposes
ratification of the three trade agreements negotiated between the US and Korea,
Colombia and Panama. The SPEEA Council opposes the Trans-Pacific Partnership as
long as it conforms to the NAFTA model. The Council authorizes SPEEA staff and
delegates to lobby in Congress to reject the agreements.
PRO
1. Free trade agreements have a consistent track record of failure
2. Free trade agreements increase
offshore outsourcing, which will indirectly worsen our job security.
3. Stopping these agreements would encourage consideration of the model taken in the TRADE Act.
CON
1. Washington State's economy depends on exports such as aerospace, software and agriculture. Free trade agreements prevent other countries from raising tariffs that block our exports.
2. Rejecting trade agreements might encourage protectionism in the US, leading to tariffs and higher prices at home.
3. Many economists and
policy-makers believe that free trade agreements are the best way to promote
growth.