US business holds out hope for trade deals in 2008

[Judi Lynn]

Source: Reuters

US business holds out hope for trade deals in 2008
9 Jan, 2008, 0430 hrs IST, REUTERS

WASHINGTON: US business plans to push hard for approval of free trade deals with Colombia and South Korea this year, even though leading Democratic presidential candidates oppose the two pacts, lobbyists said on Tuesday.

"I see these trade agreements as getting done in 2008 and it's our commitment to trying to get them done," Thomas Donohue, president of the US Chamber of Commerce, said at a news conference to lay out the group's legislative agenda for the year.

But even if the White House can persuade congressional leaders to schedule votes on the agreements, Donohue acknowledged they might just barely squeak through. "A trade agreement that's passed by one vote is as good as a trade agreement that's passed by a hundred votes," Donohue said.

The Bush administration hopes to add to its trade record by winning approval of those two agreements as well as one with Panama before President George W. Bush leaves office in January 2009. With anti-trade sentiment running high in the Democratic Party, presidential candidates Illinois Sen. Barack Obama, New York Sen. Hillary Clinton and former North Carolina Sen.



Read more: http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/International__Business/US_business_holds_out_hope_for_trade_deals_in_2008/articleshow/2684879.cms

[Dark]

1. Is there anyone that these free marketeers wouldn't sell out for a few more ivory backscratchers?

n/t

[Judi Lynn]

2. U.S.-Peru trade deal adds insult to NAFTA's injury

John Buell: U.S.-Peru trade deal adds insult to NAFTA's injury
By BDN Staff
Tuesday, January 08, 2008 - Bangor Daily News

Late last year, in especially untimely action, the U.S. Senate (with Sens. Susan Collins and Olympia Snowe voting yes) ratified the U.S.-Peru Free Trade Agreement. Just as its predecessor, the North American "Free" Trade Agreement, has been coming under increasing scrutiny and criticism even from some of its former advocates, Congress has now extended NAFTA’s concepts to one more South American nation. Like NAFTA before it, this deal risks further damage to the economic interests of working-class citizens not only in Maine and the U.S. but in Latin America as well.

It is a violation of truth in advertising to call NAFTA or the current deal free trade. Classic free trade agreements of the sort celebrated in the economics courses of my generation, such as Paul Samuelson’s, talked about the efficiency and win-win gains to two nations when tariffs (taxes on imports) were removed. NAFTA and the current agreement lower tariffs, but NAFTA went beyond classical free trade agreements by extending to a larger international arena strong forms of economic protectionism for particular producers.

Patent and copyright principles developed in the U.S. market are now to be imposed on all signatories to future corporate trade agreements. Indeed, this is one of the major reasons U.S. corporate lobbies push so hard to keep expanding the reach of these treaties. Signatories to these pacts are now obliged to accept monopoly control over the production and distribution of new technologies and drugs. This monopoly protection over certain industries, often justified with claims of "incentives for further research," is a clear violation of the principles of market freedom so often touted by mainstream economists.

Here in the U.S., the vast profits generated by patent and copyright monopolies have done more to fund deceptive and demeaning ads than new wonder drugs. They have proved to be major incentive to withholding valuable information from the public.

More:
http://bangornews.com/news/t/viewpoints.aspx?articleid=158626&zoneid=67

[madrchsod]

6. nafta---the "gift" that keeps on giving-

another "gift" to the workers of the americas by the best president since sliced bread-- bill clinton

[ClintonTyree]

3. "The Bush administration hopes to add to its trade record"......

do you mean that sterling "trade record" that has caused the elimination of millions of American jobs, the flight of American corporations to off-shore tax havens and exponential increases in corporate welfare? THAT "trade record"? :eyes:

By all means, let's push this through ASAP. The time is growing short for corporations to rape and plunder the American economy. They absolutely NEED these trade agreements to level the playing field. :sarcasm:

[flashl]

4. Business vs public interest in full view.

In which market are they going to SELL their products?

[annabanana]

5. No hurry. I don't see any un-diebolded Democrat who would

interfere with their plans..