Emad Mekay

WASHINGTON, Jul 28 2005 (IPS) — The U.S. House of Representatives narrowly passed legislation early Thursday to implement a controversial trade deal between the United States and six Latin American nations, but opponents say the slim win reflects a growing distrust of “free trade” in the United States.

The 217-215 vote came after heated lobbying and a marathon debate over the pact, which will ease barriers to U.S. trade with Costa Rica, El Salvador, Guatemala, Honduras, Nicaragua and the Dominican Republic. The legislation now needs only Pres. George W. Bush’s signature to become law.

CAFTA critics, while disappointed with the vote’s outcome, say they are encouraged by the narrow margin of approval. They argue it shows that many in the United States have lost faith after similar agreements sapped jobs through outsourcing to countries with laxer labour standards.

Lori Wallach of Public Citizen’s Global Trade Watch, one of the staunchest critics of the CAFTA pact and its predecessor, the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) between Canada, the United States and Mexico, said that the administration lost the battle of selling CAFTA on its alleged benefits, and was forced to resort to backroom deal-making and partisan pressure instead.

She said that passing CAFTA required last-minute “procedural stunts” even after weeks of Pres. Bush’s personal attention, a rare presidential visit to Congress on the day of the vote, months of Republican leadership “threats and goodies”, and an army of corporate lobbyists to push the economically modest CAFTA.

“The CAFTA vote became a highly politicised referendum on whether Pres. Bush would be made a lame duck, but the CAFTA debate makes clear that a dramatic shift in U.S. trade politics has occurred, and the NAFTA trade model is dead,” she said.

Many observers say that CAFTA was so unpopular and opponents were worried about such a broad array of issues that the agreement needed intensive lobbying from the start.

“This administration was unable to pass CAFTA on its merits, so it turned to scare tactics and lies, making the absurd claim that rejecting CAFTA would lead to violence and a dictatorship in Central America,” said Burke Stansbury of the Committee in Solidarity with the People of El Salvador.

“As we expected, the House Speaker kept the roll call open until after midnight while the Bush administration twisted arms and bought off the remaining votes necessary for approval,” he said.

Others said the tough passage of CAFTA vindicated their point that the administration is growing more attuned to big business and less so to ordinary citizens.

“In forcing passage of an unpopular trade agreement, the administration chose to ignore widespread concerns raised by many members of Congress and their constituents, as well as by farmers, trade unions, and church and community groups in the U.S., Central America and the Dominican Republic,” said Stephanie Weinberg of Oxfam America.

“Whatever the spin, DR-CAFTA will institutionalise an uneven playing field instead of establishing fair and equitable rules for trade,” she said.

The treaty became controversial not only for its weak labour and environmental standards, which drew the enmity of many Democrats, but also for provisions on intellectual property that block access to more affordable generic prescription drugs.

The Global AIDS Alliance, HealthGap and Doctors without Borders, among others, have fiercely opposed the clauses dealing with patented medicines.

“This vote is a betrayal of people living with AIDS and other health conditions,” said Paul Zeitz of the Global AIDS Alliance.

The treaty will prolong patent-holders’ monopolies over the marketing of a medicine, CAFTA foes say. When generic drugs cannot enter the market, drug prices are higher and fewer people have access to medicines.

“The Bush administration bullied Central American governments into signing on to a bad agreement that will have serious repercussions for those who are already disadvantaged in these highly unequal societies where most of the poor live in rural areas, rely on income from agriculture, and must pay for medicines out-of-pocket,” said Weinberg of Oxfam.

Despite the defeat in Congress, activists vowed to continue their struggle against the pact.

“This vote will not be forgotten by the people of the Americas,” said Holly Miller of Witness for Peace.

“It is another example of a policy that seeks to dominate, economically and politically, a region of people demanding democracy and self-determination. The people of Central America will continue to resist the implementation of this agreement, and we stand in solidarity with them in the face of this injustice.”