Opposition to Panama Free Trade Agreement Goes Bipartisan

by: David Sirota

Tue May 26, 2009 at 15:00


For a while now, polls have told us that opposition to our current NAFTA-style trade policies is bipartisan - both Republican and Democratic voters know we are getting sold out. So it's great to finally see that bipartisan opposition being represented (if minimally) in the U.S. Senate:

U.S. Senator Olympia J. Snowe (R-Maine) today stated her opposition to congressional passage of the U.S.-Panama Trade Promotion Agreement until Panama's status as a tax haven and the inadequate enforcement of U.S. trade rights have been fully addressed.

"Congressional approval of this agreement before Panama reforms its banking sector to allow for greater transparency would do more than merely reward Panama's facilitation of tax avoidance and evasion by wealthy U.S. individuals or companies which seek to hide untaxed proceeds in its banks," said Snowe, a senior member of the Senate Committee on Finance which today held a hearing on the free trade pact.

Maine, like most of New England, has been decimated by corporate-written trade policies, and with folks like Rep. Mike Michaud (D-ME) leading the push for trade reform, Snowe has clearly made a politically smart move. More broadly, her move shows - once again - that the trade debate in this country and in D.C. is changing.  

David Sirota :: Opposition to Panama Free Trade Agreement Goes Bipartisan

Tags: (All Tags)
Print Friendly View Send As Email
Interesting (4.00 / 1)
Being from Maine originally, I know that Collins usually goes the same way as Snowe on "free" trade (for Peru, against CAFTA and Oman). It looks like for a while there might be a standoff on trade, with no reform but no new deals either.



Jobs are to industrial society what farms were to agrarian times: (0.00 / 0)
They are a means of acquiring the currency needed to purchase food, for example.

You just don't ship them overseas!

We've had many discussions concerning this over the past decade; the conclusion was that circa 1968 Nixonians convinced blue-collar, unionized white men that humbling blacks, browns, intellectuals, women, etc. was more important than their economic security.

They agreed to be lent money as a substitute for wages. They agreed to have their jobs and their children's jobs shipped first to the South, then to Mexico, then to India and China.

They endorsed this biennially all the way up to 2006.

Ask them how they feel about it now.


Good news. (0.00 / 0)
I wish more Dems, including Obama, would oppose this.  

Please keep us posted... (0.00 / 0)


Donate to Open Left








Friends of the Earth thanks the OpenLeft community for the ideas you generate and your contributions to the progressive movement.

As an anti-spam measure, there is a 24-hour waiting period after registering before new users can comment.
blog advertising is good for you
blog advertising is good for you
SEARCH

   

Advanced Search