Emad Mekay

WASHINGTON, Jul 11 2005 (IPS) — A majority of the U.S. people say they would support a controversial trade deal between the United States and six Latin American nations if its labour provisions are amended to allow greater protection of U.S. workers and better standards for Latin workers, a new poll found Monday.

The trade agreement with Costa Rica, El Salvador, Guatemala, Honduras and Nicaragua and a linked pact with the Dominican Republic was completed a year ago but has met stiff opposition because of what many say is its negative impact on both U.S. workers and some sectors of the economy, and the potential it could further impoverish already struggling Latin American nations.

When asked about the Central American-Dominican Republic Free Trade Agreement (CAFTA-DR), half of respondents said they favour the U.S. Congress approving it, according to the poll by the University of Maryland’s Programme on International Policy Attitudes (PIPA).

But that figure jumped to 65 percent when asked whether they would support it if the government committed to substantially increase federal spending on programmes to help U.S. workers who lose their jobs, and to make sure that Central American countries enforce health and safety standards for their workers.

The labour issue has been among one of the most controversial provisions of the deal, and poor working conditions in Central America have attracted substantial criticism from U.S. lawmakers, interest groups and organised labour.

The 1,000-page trade pact, one of the most divisive proposed by the White House since Pres. George W. Bush took office in 2001, will have to pass its final crucial test later this month when it comes to a vote on the floor of the House of Representatives, the lower chamber of the U.S. Congress.

The deal cleared a major hurdle in June when it passed a vote in the U.S. Senate, with 78 percent of Republicans in favour and 73 percent of Democrats opposed.

The poll, however, found that support among the U.S. public was not affected by party affiliation, with 50 percent of Republicans in favour, and 51 percent of Democrats.

“While in Congress there may be a polarised and partisan debate between those who extol the general economic benefits of trade and those who worry about the effect of trade on U.S. workers, the U.S. public favours a grand bargain: allowing the growth of trade provided there is more help for workers at home and more enforcement of labour standards abroad,” said Steven Kull, director of PIPA.

The poll reflected a general dissatisfaction with U.S. international trade policy, with 56 percent of respondents agreeing that, “I support the growth of international trade in principle, but I am not satisfied with the way the U.S. government is dealing with the effects of trade on American jobs, the poor in other countries and the environment.”

Sixty-three percent said that “government efforts to help retrain workers who have lost jobs due to international trade” are not adequate.

Only 26 percent found the efforts adequate, and five percent said they were more than adequate.

On Monday, the CAFTA debate was still raging in Washington ahead of the House vote.

Supporters say that it will boost interregional trade, help U.S. companies and businesses and stimulate economic development in Central American nations. Under CAFTA-DR, more than 80 percent of U.S. consumer and industrial exports and over half of U.S. farm exports to Central America would become duty-free immediately.

For the DR-CAFTA countries, 100 percent of non-textile and non-agricultural goods would enter the United States duty-free immediately. Many goods would have tariffs phased out incrementally so that duty-free treatment is reached in five, 10, 15, or 20 years from the time the agreement takes effect.

Critics say the deal will have negative effects on certain import-competing sectors, like sugar, and their workers. Environmental and labour rights issues in some DR-CAFTA countries have also caused organised labor to come out strongly against the deal.

Rep. Sander Levin, a Democrat from Michigan, wrote Monday in the Washington Post that labour conditions in Central American nations were a source of major worry. He noted that the State Department and International Labor Organisation (ILO) reported that the basic legal framework is not in place to protect workers’ rights.

“Regrettably, CAFTA sanctions the status quo or worse by saying to these countries: ‘Enforce your own laws’ when it comes to internationally recognised labor standards,” Levin wrote.

The Bush administration has offered more financial resources for CAFTA countries to help them enforce labour standards, a move that Democrats said was bypassing the main problem – poor laws, not just poor enforcement.

The deal has also been faulted as potentially violating U.S. immigration policies.

“This agreement opens America’s borders to a lot more than sugar and bananas,” said Republican Congressman Tom Tancredo in a statement Monday. “This agreement, as drafted, will effectively give people from El Salvador, Honduras, Guatemala, Costa Rica, and the Dominican Republic a de facto right to work in the United States.”

The congressman is worried that the agreement will invite foreign companies to challenge U.S. immigration policies in international tribunals on the grounds that CAFTA-DR gives Central American nations to the right to argue that U.S. immigration laws impede their ability to access the U.S. service sector.

“That would force Congress to change our immigration laws, or subject our businesses to trade sanctions,” he warned.