President Bush sent the mutually beneficial U.S.-Colombia Free Trade Agreement to Congress last week after more than a year of negotiations.
But rather than allow a vote, Democratic Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi, in a remarkable display of spinelessness, changed 30 years of procedure, and for the first time in history of Congress effectively rejected an international trade agreement.
By shielding members of her party from recording a vote, Pelosi sold out American consumers, farmers and businesses to unions and political expediency. This development, sadly, is a manifestation of a year of anti-trade demagoguery coming from the Democratic Party on the campaign trail.
Since World War II, Congress, whichever party ruled, has embraced the benefits and prosperity of international free trade. Yet, with the recent economic downturn, opponents have increasingly exploited the fears of Americans.
It is an abrupt and inexplicable departure by leading Democratic Party presidential hopefuls and their party.
When Hillary Clinton demoted her top adviser, Mark Penn, recently, for having the audacity to lobby for more trade, she sent a clear message that protectionism had overtaken the enlightened policies of her husband’s administration.
Barack Obama, too, has featured abrasive criticisms of international agreements like the North American Free Trade Agreement in his stump speeches. Both have consistently linked recent downturns to trade pacts while campaigning in industrial states like Pennsylvania and Ohio.
But they are shamefully misleading voters about the long-term economic effects of NAFTA. From 1993 to 2007, NAFTA member nations tripled their trade with the United States. Investments by NAFTA member nations in the United States have grown more than 100 percent since ratification, while our manufacturing output has grown 58 percent. Exports reached an all-time high in 2007.
And jobs? Since NAFTA’s ratification, employment has increased 24 percent. Unemployment, which was at 6.9 percent in 1993, is now around 4.9 percent — only that high after a recent bump. Those economic indicators far exceed the 15 years preceding NAFTA.
In the case of Colombia, the shelving of the agreement is particularly perplexing. Colombia is our only ally in the area. The nation’s human- rights record is steadily improving, even as it fights drug trade, corruption and terror organizations — egged on by its hostile neighbors.
Moreover, Colombia exports to the United States already are duty-free, so this agreement would only make trade fairer. The agreement is also virtually identical to one Congress recently approved with Peru.
So there can be no other explanation. In the midst of a potential recession, Democratic Party leaders are being led by political calculation, special interests and the fringe of their party, rather than common sense on trade.