LegislativeupdateDec2006.html

ADVOCACY & NON-VIOLENT ACTIVISM UPDATE: December 2006

By Beth Peery

Peru Trade Agreement

The Bush Administration has attempted to extend the free trade model to Peru through the recently debated Peru Free Trade Agreement (PFTA). The negative implications of PFTA on Peru actually exceed those of its predecessor agreements, NAFTA and CAFTA. The agreement fails to require any labor or environmental standards in Peru and actually encourages the country to lower its standards further, arguably to increase foreign investment. PFTA would lower Peru 's tariffs on agricultural products making it impossible for poor farming communities in Peru to compete with subsidized agricultural products from the United States . This agreement would also prevent Peru 's timely access to important life saving generic drugs because of the agreement's intellectual property provisions. Ultimately, if PFTA passes, the result will be very negative for Peru and its citizens.

Many expected the PFTA to be brought for a vote in the House during the recent lame-duck session. However, the White House has decided to postpone the vote until next year. It is speculated that this is because PFTA falls under the fast track negotiating authority. This means that Congress can only vote “yes” or “no” on the agreement as a whole without being allowed to make any amendments. The House Parliamentarian has ruled that implementing legislation for trade agreements on the fast track can only be submitted to Congress once. If PFTA failed to pass this session, the Bush Administration would have to submit it again without the fast track protection, thereby giving Congress the ability to make amendments, slow the process down, and potentially alter the agreement.

Immigration

In September, the Secure Fence Act (HR 6061) was passed, authorizing the construction of an additional 700 miles of fencing between the U.S. and Mexico and increasing border militarization. The implementation of the Act, if spending is authorized, raises concerns surrounding a potential increase of human rights violations along the border. The Fence Act belies the shortsighted manner with which Congress is addressing the issue of immigration. Rather than addressing the root causes forcing people to flee their homelands, they are merely attempting to block immigrants from enter our country.

Economics, political oppression and the inability to provide for one's family are among the conditions forcing people to emigrate. Therefore, Congress should be questioning the implications of its foreign and trade policies on the general populations of our NAFTA/CAFTA partners. Free trade agreements prevent the development of favorable economic conditions and have been linked with increasing political tensions in these countries.

Other bills that the House passed this year also demonstrate the failure of Congress to address the root causes of immigration. The Immigration Law Enforcement Act (HR 6095) gives authority to state and local law enforcement to assist in the prosecution of alien smugglers and also reforms the litigation procedure. These Congressional actions are demonstrative of a limited focus to a problem that has resulted from a multitude of other situations that we helped to create.