iPhone app iPad app Android phone app Android tablet app More

Trade Deals Face Growing House Opposition Amid Continued Violence In Colombia (VIDEO)

First Posted: 08/11/11 02:00 PM ET Updated: 10/11/11 06:12 AM ET

WASHINGTON -- On August 4, Senate leaders announced a "breakthrough" in negotiations over three trade deals currently pending before Congress that now appear likely to clear the upper chamber. But union leaders and an unusual bipartisan coalition in the House remain opposed to the pacts, with resistance centered on the continued, rampant violence against union workers in Colombia.

As HuffPost's Dave Jamieson reported in July, union members in Colombia are routinely murdered with impunity. Over the past 25 years, nearly 3,000 workers have been killed in the country, with convictions resulting in just six percent of all cases.

That violence has continued, and even escalated, since President George W. Bush first negotiated the trade deal with Colombia in 2007. That year, 37 union workers were killed. The next year, 52, followed by 49 in 2009 and 51 last year.

As a result, unions in the U.S. are strongly opposing the trade deal with Colombia, a move led by the AFL-CIO, the country's largest federation of organized labor groups. The AFL-CIO has said it does not want to see the U.S. condoning violence against workers, nor does it want American workers to have to compete with wages that are depressed using the credible threat of murder.

President Barack Obama has tried to address these concerns, negotiating an "action plan" on violence against workers that was announced in April. The action plan isn't formally part of the trade agreement, and it doesn't require the Colombian government to actually curb violence against union workers -- it simply requires the government to create institutions designed to combat the violence. If those institutions are ineffective, the Colombian government faces no consequences. And there are few signs that the action plan is making a difference -- in fact, since it was signed, 10 more union workers have been killed in Colombia.

The day Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) and Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ken.) announced their agreement on the trade issues, AFL-CIO President Richard Trumka penned a letter to all members of Congress reiterating union opposition to the Colombia deal and highlighting continued violence. Whatever formal worker protections are outlined in the trade deal, Trumka said, the Colombian government simply does not have the resources or the capacity to enforce them amid widespread assassinations.

The Senate "breakthrough" does not involve any actual changes to any of the trade agreements under consideration -- it's a procedural maneuver designed to shore up votes. Both Republicans and Democrats support passing the trade deals in the Senate, but Republicans in both chambers have balked at the prospect of continuing to provide Trade Adjustment Assistance (TAA) to workers whose jobs are sent abroad by the trade pacts. In late July, a dozen Senate Republicans announced that they would not filibuster a vote on TAA, amid heavy pressure from the U.S. Chamber of Commerce -- a lobbying front-group for some of the most powerful American corporations -- and a coalition of CEOs known as the Business Roundtable.

Reid and McConnell agreed to hold separate votes on TAA and the trade deals, preventing opponents of TAA from teaming up with opponents of the trade pacts and shooting down the entire package. With the threat of a filibuster removed, both TAA and the trade agreements are likely to pass through independent votes.

Similar procedural gambits have less traction in the House, where labor-allied Democrats and some Tea Party conservatives still oppose the trade agreements, and still more Tea Party members staunchly oppose TAA. But even if both chambers do agree to extend TAA to laid-off workers as part of the trade deals, Congress would still have to pass a separate appropriations bill to ensure that the money actually makes it out the door. And in a political environment dominated by harsh spending cuts, Democrats view that prospect as extremely unlikely.

"The TAA, even if it gets authorized, isn't going to get appropriated," Rep. Brad Sherman (D-Calif.) told HuffPost. "Have you ever met a Republican freshman in favor of appropriating TAA?"

House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) also pushed back against the trade agreements in an interview last week with MSNBC's Andrea Mitchell.

"The White House may support it, but the Congress may have a different view," Pelosi said, adding that it's "debatable" whether the trade deals will create U.S. jobs.

Based on official estimates from the U.S. International Trade Commission, economist Robert Scott of the Economic Policy Institute expects the Colombia and South Korea trade pacts to send about 200,000 U.S. jobs abroad.

FOLLOW HUFFPOST POLITICS
Subscribe to the HuffPost Hill newsletter!
WASHINGTON -- On August 4, Senate leaders announced a "breakthrough" in negotiations over three trade deals currently pending before Congress that now appear likely to clear the upper chamber. But uni...
WASHINGTON -- On August 4, Senate leaders announced a "breakthrough" in negotiations over three trade deals currently pending before Congress that now appear likely to clear the upper chamber. But uni...
 
 
  • Comments
  • 54
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2  Next ›  Last »  (2 total)
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
hopingheart
We can succeed only if we find a way together...
07:42 PM on 08/11/2011
More outrageous market manipulation by corporatists for profits over the wellbeing of this nation.
04:47 PM on 08/11/2011
Maybe the members of congress and the guy in the white house need to watch Dylan Ratigan tell them to their faces on what to do, how they brought this nation to this point in time. Then put little signs around their heads stating "Corruption starts here".
03:50 PM on 08/11/2011
More than 50% of Colombian unionist were from the FARC a terrorist group, why congress is agaist the only friend America has in South America? Chile, Peru, Brazil and Colombia are countries with a strong economy, they do not depend of United States, they grow average 8% a year. Democrats are acting so silly and the end the one which is going to get trades will be China.
photo
JumpySnark
My micro-bio is still pending approval...
05:17 PM on 08/11/2011
Ricardo, I've been to Colombia seven times and I assure you that FARC members have never made up half of the unionized workforce. What is clear is that the murders of union workers were carried out by the same oligarchy that FARC opposed.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
wa-st-concerned
03:35 PM on 08/11/2011
How can they say these trade deals create jobs here when they are shipping jobs out at record rates due to the deals? MAKES NO COMMON SENSE.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
04:28 PM on 08/11/2011
If you stand on a bluff overlooking the ocean, "common sense" tells you the world is quite flat and that if you go too far out into the ocean, you'll fall off the very flat earth.

Sometimes, you need to look into the details before you make a rush to judgment about some particular issue. If you knew very much about the economy of Colombia, you'd realize we are not in danger of losing a significant number of jobs to that country. In fact, we are likely to gain some as their economy grows they love to buy stuff from the USA.

We should be working with all our neighbors in the Western Hemisphere to create a powerful trade block that can out compete Asia and Europe. We'd be a lot better off for it. And as Ricardo said, above, and I have said in the past, if we don't they'll look elsewhere and leave us in the dust, worring about how to protect the members of the buggy whip guild.
05:11 PM on 08/11/2011
Will Colombia's workers work for less than U.S. workers? Of course. Therefore we ARE in danger of losing a significant number of jobs to them. Free trade apologists have to own up to the devastation these agreements have caused to the middle class. We need to protect key industries with tariffs (other countries do), and negotiate only FAIR trade agreements.
photo
GG NV
Define the Future by Learning the Past
03:25 PM on 08/11/2011
The violence is disturbing to say the least, however to not support our Latin American freedom loving neighbors is a mistake and could cost the US in the long term. The US can always approve the agreement then rescind it if the violence continues.

The violence is stemming from the rightwing paramilitaries such as the AUC who do not like unionists. The govt. needs to start cracking down on these groups or say bye bye to free trade.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
wa-st-concerned
03:36 PM on 08/11/2011
How about cracking down on it here?

Nationally, dems need to get totally involved in this "bust the unions totally" movement happening in all these red states...THE PRESIDENT INCLUDED.
photo
GG NV
Define the Future by Learning the Past
03:55 PM on 08/11/2011
I agree, but my statement was related to the Colombian Government cracking down not ours.

We don't kill unionists although the RW wish they could. I fully support the unions and yes we should quit demonizing them like Focks News and other T-bag politicians like to do.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
03:53 PM on 08/11/2011
Yes, approving the trade agreement and using it as leverage would be much more effective if we wish to exert our influence to end violence against trade unionists in Colombia. The worst thing we could do is to diminish our influence by forcing the Colombians to look to Europe and Asia as their principle trade partners.

The government in Colombia has been cracking down on the AUC and FARC for some time. Overall, it is vastly safer in Colombia now as compared to what it was like when I lived there 10 years ago. But that being said, the government needs continued support in continuing to crack down on all the senseless violence of the AUC, the FARC, the ELN, and the narcoterrorists of all stripes. They are all a bunch of gangsters who care nothing for anyone but themselves. We can support the fight against them best by supporting a more prosperous Colombia.

By the way, we can also learn a lot from Colombia. Many of their labor laws make ours look like promoters of feudalism at best. And they have a national health insurance system that makes us look like we still are using bleeding and worrying about vapors and bad humors.
05:14 PM on 08/11/2011
Labor laws like, It's OK to murder union activists?
photo
GG NV
Define the Future by Learning the Past
05:32 PM on 08/11/2011
"We can support the fight against them best by supporting a more prosperous Colombia."

I completely agree, the fight against the terrorists.
photo
Belisarius
Republicans are destroying the middle class.
03:09 PM on 08/11/2011
Higher profits, fewer jobs.

Every trade bill in the past has seen good manufacturing jobs shipped out of the country and replaced by service jobs at Walmart or hamburger joints.

How are these three new bills going to be different? They won't be.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Anym
Obama is GoldmanSachs
03:01 PM on 08/11/2011
Another "Democratic" President obsessed with off-shoring jobs, jeez at this rate I wonder if there would have been any difference if people had voted for Hillary.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
wa-st-concerned
03:38 PM on 08/11/2011
Actually, Hillary would have been fighting more for dem ideals than Obama has - she would have been engaged - (she also would have been Bill 2, but that almost seems a relief at this point)
03:50 PM on 08/11/2011
Bill gave us NAFTA - and US jobs went south to Mexico
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
jkipp
The Real Moderate America
04:59 PM on 08/11/2011
Did I not read that this bill was originally a republican President's idea?
"since President George W. Bush first negotiated the trade deal with Colombia in 2007"
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Ryan Magdangal
Pirate Satellite
02:59 PM on 08/11/2011
NO TO THIS TRADE DEAL.. I'M FOR FAIR TRADE BUT NOT THE BIG LIE FOR FREE TRADE!!! THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS FREE! THE ONLY BENEFITS ARE TO CORPORATIONS NOT AMERICAN JOBS OR TO THE EXPLOITED WORKERS IN COLUMBIA.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
03:19 PM on 08/11/2011
This is a good case in point. This writer can't even spell the place s/he knows little about. Yes, we need to protect the US coffee and banana workers from foreign competition. And the poor US flower cutters, their jobs must be protected too. They are some of the best middle class jobs we have. Oh, please, at least learn something about the place before you condem a trade agreement with them.
03:51 PM on 08/11/2011
Ryan spelled COLUMBIA correctly meatball.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
02:52 PM on 08/11/2011
There are a lot of people commenting in this thread who know very little about Colombia. To say that Colombian exports will take away jobs here in the USA is silly and uninformed at best. Colombia's principal exports to the US are cut flowers (especially in the winter), coffee, bananas, some coal, nickel, and petroleum. Last I checked we don't grow a lot of cut flowers, and those we do grow are harvested by mostly undocumented workers. Same for coffee. With the exception of Hawaii, we don't really employ too many people in coffee growing. Bananas, nickel and petroleum are not big job areas either. In fact, a lot of US oil workers go to Colombia to work.

If we want to see the efforts to end violence continue in Colombia, we need to be supportive of their efforts to grow their economy. As their economy grows, the tendency to violence decreases. I have personally seen it as I regulary travel there and used to live there. If we turn our back on Colombia, and all of Latin America for that matter, we will find them turning to other markets and we'll end up with no one to trade with. LIke it or not, international trade is here to stay, with us or without us. If we think we can best protect our workers by protecting outdated and obsolete industries we're dreaming.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
wa-st-concerned
03:41 PM on 08/11/2011
You guys said the same kind of things when all the call center jobs were shipped to India where speaking clear English seems not to be a requirement......"no good jobs would go overseas - only new opportunities for untrained labor"......then the manufacturing went, and even a lot of the companies themselves...

Not biting.....
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
04:01 PM on 08/11/2011
Are you from the United Brotherhood of Banana packers?

Call center jobs, have already gone to Mexico and Colombia. I have spoken to people a lot from there when I press 2 for español. And they have utterly nothing to do with a trade agreement. You can't impose tarrifs on the transmission of calls to or from a call center.
photo
camelias and sweet tea
Small drinking village with a shrimping problem
04:26 PM on 08/11/2011
That has NOTHING to do with a trade agreement, pay attention
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
02:41 PM on 08/11/2011
This will pass because money is needed to support big business and Jobs in america is a non issue to congress and the government. Get ready its going to be pasted!
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Alan Mack
02:35 PM on 08/11/2011
I say let Obama take these Trade Agreements and shove them up where the sun ain't shining. The only winners from these will be Wall Street, the filthy rich and Obama's Big Business cronies. The working folk, in both the U.S. and Columbia will lose and lose big. Everything Obama has done and is doing is convincing me more and more that I cannot cast a vote for this fool.

I am beginning to agree with Republican commentators when they say Obama is inept and a moral and political coward. He sold all of us a bill of goods in 2008. I severely regret ever voting for the idiot.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
wa-st-concerned
03:43 PM on 08/11/2011
....so you would vote for the opposition's agenda and candidate to punish Obama? How about putting maximum pressure on him and promoting the dem agenda - again, and again, and again.

Going to the "other side" hardly helps....it helps "them" continue to destroy this country.
05:54 PM on 08/11/2011
And you think a Republican President won't push free trade deals?! Obama's a disappointment in that he's a corporate centrist, but at least he's not insane, which the Republicans have become.

And Republicans have been selling people a bill of goods forever. With Republicans, everything is for the rich and the multi-national corporations, and screw the workers. Obama's the lesser of two evils, by far.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Summertown
A former traveler of the US now a country wife jus
02:35 PM on 08/11/2011
No more trade deals until all the loopholes are closed that allowed so many American jobs to be moved offshore. That are allowing trade deficits to balloon because this country is allowing inequality regarding tariffs and penalties. No more trade deals until the American people can be assured that what is arriving in this country won't burn down homes, poison people and pets, contaminate our lands.

No more trade deals with countries to have known human rights abuses. No more trade deals that benefit the ultra wealthy while taking away from ordinary every day people.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
xeronius
Mostly Straight, LGBTQ Friendly
02:07 PM on 08/11/2011
How about opposing it because it won't create that many jobs and opens up Panama to be an even bigger tax haven than it is?
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
frank day
Obama cares about all of U.S.
02:05 PM on 08/11/2011
Offshoring more jobs, cutting corporate taxes, and slashing social security.

Ayn Rand would be so happy.
02:02 PM on 08/11/2011
more actions by the dems to k!..ll jobs..... thanks dems....
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
frank day
Obama cares about all of U.S.
02:05 PM on 08/11/2011
Because Rs oppose Free Trade???
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Dan1902
United we bargain,divided we beg!
02:12 PM on 08/11/2011
Sad !! Free Trade has decimated our manufacturing base!! Get a clue Sherlost Holmes!