House Delays Action On Colombian FTA

James A. Morrissey, Washington Correspondent

After the House of Representatives derailed the US/Colombia Free Trade Agreement (FTA) last week, trade lobbyists in Washington feel it is dead for this year, and its future will have to be determined by the next president. Sens. Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton are opposed to the agreement, at least in its present form, but Sen. John McCain supports it. There is a remote possibility it could come up during a post-election lame-duck session; There is some precedent for Congress dealing with controversial trade legislation in that way — that is how the North American Free Trade Agreement was ratified 14 years ago.

When President Bush last week sent the proposed agreement to Congress under a procedure that would require an up or down vote within 90 legislative days, he created a major storm on Capitol Hill. House Ways and Means Committee Chairman Charles B. Rangel, D-N.Y., said the president took an “unprecedented step” when he submitted the agreement over the objections of the leadership of the House of Representatives, and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., charged the president had “ abandoned the traditions of consultation that have governed past agreements.”

Following a sometimes heated debate on April 10, the House voted 224 to 195 to set aside the fast track consideration of the agreement and permit the House to consider it in its own time and in its own way. Pelosi indicated she intends to use the Colombia FTA as leverage to get President Bush to support additional economic stimulus measures supported by Democrats, including funds to help workers who lose their jobs as a result of import competition. Senate Finance Committee Chairman Max Baucus, D-Mont., concurred, saying his finance committee will not consider any FTAs until expanded adjustment assistance legislation is enacted.

Following the House vote, President Bush issued a statement saying the House action “damages our economy, our national security and our relations with an important ally.”

Rangel said the new rule under which the pact could yet conceivably be considered this year is necessary because “the president violated protocol under trade promotion authority that has served us so well in the past,” adding that by ignoring the views of the House, he took an unsuccessful gamble to force a vote in 90 days. Rangel said that by removing what he called “an artificial time constraint,” the House has created an atmosphere in which members may get to understand more about the agreement and facilitate removing some of the barriers that stand in the way of ratification.

The key to consideration of the FTA this year is whether an accommodation can be made with organized labor. The American Federation of Labor and Congress of Industrial Organizations (AFL-CIO) has cited a number of labor rights abuses, and it does not believe Colombia’s labor laws conform to international standards. Those thorny issues are unlikely to be resolved in a time frame that would permit consideration of the FTA this year. In addition, some manufacturing industries do not see how the pact can help save US jobs.

US textile manufacturers have supported the pact because they believe it will create new markets for US exports, and retailers and other importers believe it would provide a wider choice for consumers.

April 15, 2008