G
Gandalf Grey
Guest
SECRET TRADE DEAL - DAY 21: Dem K Street Lobbyists Begin Whipping Votes
By David Sirota
Created May 31 2007 - 10:00am
This is another in a series of ongoing posts [1] following the announcement
of a secret free trade deal on May 10, 2007 between a handful of senior
Democrats and the Bush administration.
Three weeks after a group of senior Democrats announced a secret free trade
deal with top Bush administration officials, Democratic K Street lobbyists
are now telling reporters they are making passage of the deal a top
priority, likely meaning another NAFTA-style campaign to ram the deal
through Congress. Many - if not most - of these lobbyists are former
lawmakers and Capitol Hill staff using their ties to Congress to twist arms.
Not coincidentally, just last week, congressional Democrats gutted a
lobbying reform bill [2] by removing provisions that would have forced
lawmakers and staff to wait at least two years before becoming paid
lobbyists. Nonetheless, despite the K Street campaign, business interests
say they are increasingly worried that they will not have the votes in
Congress to pass the secret deal, whose legislative text remains secret.
Here is today's update.
NATIONAL JOURNAL - DEMOCRATIC K STREET LOBBYISTS RAMPING UP PRESSURE TO PASS
SECRET TRADE DEAL: National Journal this week reports that "business
lobbyists and K Street trade advocates are gearing up to help the Democratic
Congress pass" the secret trade deal, even though the legislative text of
the deal remain hidden from the public and from rank-and-file Democratic
lawmakers. The story notes that, for instance, Democratic corporate lobbyist
Scott Parven is "eager to do his part to bolster support for the free-trade
agreements." He said: "We need to have more Democratic business lobbyists
talking to Democratic members and staff." Parven then went on the attack
against the labor, environmental, small business, agriculture and consumer
protection organizations who oppose the deal. "We need to provide a
substantive counterpoint to activists on the left who are banging members
over the head saying this is a terrible deal." Another Democratic business
lobbyist added, "The reality is that Democrats are going to be split on
trade issues, so the business community's main agenda is going to be to
shore up virtually unanimous support among Republicans in the House and work
with Rangel and Levin and the leadership to get 70 to 100 Democrats."The
lobbyist "said that K Street supporters of the deal are coordinating with
the pro-trade New Democrat Coalition to win over hesitant Democrats."
K STREET FRETS OVER POSSIBILITY OF MAJOR OPPOSITION TO SECRET DEAL: Inside
U.S. Trade last week reported that "U.S. industry supporters of the
bilateral free trade agreement with Peru have privately expressed fears that
a vote in the trade committees could be tighter than expected when the deal
comes up. In the Senate Finance Committee, while Montana Sen. Max Baucus was
at the press conference announcing the secret deal, "some supporters are
worried that Sens. Debbie Stabenow (D-MI), Jay Rockefeller (D-WV) and Kent
Conrad (D-ND) may vote against the Peru FTA." The newsletter additionally
reports that the legislative language of the secret deal remains secret, but
lobbyists "are aware that House Democrats opposed to the template will
closely scrutinize the legal text and the extent to which it lives up to the
conceptual framework." The pressure to release the details for public
analysis means "Democratic [Capitol Hill] staff wants to make sure it will
stand up to that scrutiny."
PELOSI SAYS SHE WILL IGNORE THE MAJORITY OF DEMS IF THEY OPPOSE THE SECRET
DEAL: Rank and file Democrats, led by Reps. Brad Sherman (D-CA) and Marcy
Kaptur (D-OH), are planning to push a Democratic caucus resolution barring
the Speaker of the House from bringing the Bush administration's request for
reauthorization of fast track to the House floor for a vote unless a
majority of Democrats approve. When asked about this resolution this week,
Inside U.S. Trade reports that Pelosi balked, indicating she will ignore the
resolution. "I would encourage my colleagues not to be proposing resolutions
that say the majority of the majority does this or that," she said at a
press conference, adding: "I have to take into consideration something
broader than the majority of the majority of the Democratic Caucus."
Currently, polls show the majority of Americans oppose the continuation of
the current lobbyist-written trade policies that fast track advances.
Congressional Quarterly [3] reports that according to "a member of Pelosi's
leadership team" a number "of Democrats are now calling for a 'majority of
the majority' rule on the issue of free trade." This senior Democratic
lawmaker said: "The vote on extending funding for the war created a great
deal of anxiety and put stress on the caucus. People are concerned that it
will set a precedent. They are asking whether this will occur on other
issues."
DEM LEADERS STILL SAY THEY WILL RELY ON MAJORITY OF REPUBLICANS TO PASS THE
SECRET DEAL: Last week, Democrats used parliamentary rules to use a majority
of Republican votes to give President Bush a blank check to continue the
Iraq War. Now, Inside U.S. Trade reports that House Ways and Means Committee
Chairman Charlie Rangel expects he will require votes from the vast majority
of Republicans in order to pass the secret deal - over the objections of
most Democrats. Rangel is still declining to give an estimate of how many
Democrats would support the secret deal "except to signal he did not expect
a majority of the [Democratic] caucus." Observers "say the most Democratic
votes Peru and Panama will attract is roughly 70" - or less than a third of
all Democrats in Congress. Roll Call [4] reports that "Rangel's negotiating
with GOP leaders and the White House on trade with Pelosi's blessing angered
liberals within the Caucus, who fear the House will move forward with trade
measures opposed by a large bloc of the majority party." For his part,
Sherman told Inside U.S. Trade that he believes Pelosi "would not allow this
legislation to come to the floor for a vote unless it has the 'overwhelming
support' of the Democratic Caucus." Sherman "said he based that assessment
on 'impressions' he gained in his conversation with Pelosi."
MORE STATES PASS RESOLUTIONS DEMANDING CONGRESS REJECT FAST TRACK: Public
Citizen reports that two more states have passed resolutions demanding
Congress reject President Bush's request to reauthorize fast track
authority - the authority that allows the White House to eliminate all
labor, environmental and human rights protections from trade deals. Both
Pennsylvania [5] and Nevada [6] were the latest legislatures to pass the
resolution. Democratic leaders in Congress, nonetheless, continue to say
that the secret trade deal may pave the way for them to support Bush's fast
track request.
NY TIMES - "FAULT LINES RE-EMERGING IN THE DEM PARTY" OVER THE DEAL: The New
York Times [7] reports that five months into the new Congress, "fault lines
were re-emerging in the party." Specifically, "House Democrats are only
beginning to deal with their deep divisions on trade, as a closed caucus
last week underscored." Some freshmen, like Representative Betty Sutton,
Democrat of Ohio, are intent on making major changes to American trade
policy, much greater than the recent deal with the Bush administration on
environmental and labor standards announced by the Democratic leadership.
"Our problems with the trading system and the fact that it is broken are
much bigger than just having these standards on paper," Ms. Sutton said.
COLUMNIST - JORDAN TRADE DEAL SHOWS WHY NEW SECRET DEAL SHOULD BE LOOKED AT
WITH SKEPTICISM: Citing the utter lack of enforcement of much-touted labor
protections in the Jordan Free Trade Agreement, syndicate columnist Robyn
Blumner [8] writes in the Salt Lake Tribune that "this example is why I
approach the 'historic' deal struck between congressional Democrats and the
Bush administration on future trade deals with a dose of skepticism." She
notes that "in the same Agence France Presse story announcing the agreement
in which Democratic leaders cheered the advance, the U.S. Chamber of
Commerce and the National Association of Manufacturers are quoted as also
welcoming the deal" because "as Tom Donohue, president and chief executive
of the Chamber explained, they'd been given assurances, relative to American
workers, 'that the labor provisions cannot be read to require compliance
with ILO Conventions.'" She concludes: "If our government won't ensure that
overseas workers who produce goods that come into our country are treated
decently, then maybe it's time for the private sector to have a shot. The
Decent Working Conditions and Fair Competition Act has been introduced in
Congress. It would bar the import of goods made with sweatshop labor and
would give U.S. companies the ability to sue their competitors that sell
them."
NATIONAL JOURNAL - LABOR PROVISIONS "UNLIKELY" TO BE ENFORCEABLE: National
Journal trade expert Bruce Stokes writes that "it is unlikely that if a
country violates the labor-rights provisions it will be subject to any quick
penalties" under the secret deal. "The process for the reimposition of
tariffs to enforce labor rights, under this deal, is modeled on similar
language in the free-trade agreement with Jordan," he writes. "But that
provision has never been tested. And, as some on the left have already
pointed out, it is unlikely that the anti-union Bush administration will
agree to bring a case against the abuse of labor."
MIAMI HERALD - STATE DEPARTMENT CITED PERU FOR LABOR VIOLATIONS: The Miami
Herald [9] reports that the government of Peru is expected to rubber stamp
the secret trade deal, and that the deal is pushing forward even though "the
U.S. State Department reported last year that Peruvian companies illegally
keep workers from joining labor unions and deliberately hire workers
informally to avoid providing healthcare or paid vacations." The report
"also found that some 30,000 people do forced labor -- particularly in the
logging industry -- and tens of thousands of children are working,
particularly in rural areas and in the drug trade."
HAYDEN - SECRET DEAL IS "FRESHENED" NAFTA: Writing in the San Francisco
Chronicle [10], House Speaker Nancy Pelosi's hometown paper, longtime
progressive activist Tom Hayden says the secret trade deal poses a "crisis"
for Democrats. "Besides ending the Iraq war, the top priority of American
voters in November 2006 was fair trade," Hayden writes, citing public
opinion polls. "Nevertheless, on May 10 Pelosi, White House officials and
pro-corporate Democrats announced a surprise "bipartisan" agreement on
trade, without revealing any details. As the package is rushed to a vote, it
appears to be a 'freshened' version of NAFTA (the phrase is that of Mickey
Kantor, trade czar under President Bill Clinton)." Pelosi, he says, "faces
strong opposition from most members of her caucus, labor leaders and
environmental activists" because she is "promoting the common agendas of
Wall Street, Hollywood and the New Democrats." The ultimate question, Hayden
concludes, is "whether the Democrats will continue their support of
NAFTA-style trade agreements, or else begin to construct a kind of global
New Deal as an alternative."
NY TIMES - COLOMBIA HAS NOT MADE NECESSARY IMPROVEMENTS: The ardently free
trade New York Times editorial board [11] writes that the proposed free
trade pact with Colombia "rightly remains in legislative limbo over a much
starker labor problem - Colombia leads the world in the killing of labor
activists." Though President
By David Sirota
Created May 31 2007 - 10:00am
This is another in a series of ongoing posts [1] following the announcement
of a secret free trade deal on May 10, 2007 between a handful of senior
Democrats and the Bush administration.
Three weeks after a group of senior Democrats announced a secret free trade
deal with top Bush administration officials, Democratic K Street lobbyists
are now telling reporters they are making passage of the deal a top
priority, likely meaning another NAFTA-style campaign to ram the deal
through Congress. Many - if not most - of these lobbyists are former
lawmakers and Capitol Hill staff using their ties to Congress to twist arms.
Not coincidentally, just last week, congressional Democrats gutted a
lobbying reform bill [2] by removing provisions that would have forced
lawmakers and staff to wait at least two years before becoming paid
lobbyists. Nonetheless, despite the K Street campaign, business interests
say they are increasingly worried that they will not have the votes in
Congress to pass the secret deal, whose legislative text remains secret.
Here is today's update.
NATIONAL JOURNAL - DEMOCRATIC K STREET LOBBYISTS RAMPING UP PRESSURE TO PASS
SECRET TRADE DEAL: National Journal this week reports that "business
lobbyists and K Street trade advocates are gearing up to help the Democratic
Congress pass" the secret trade deal, even though the legislative text of
the deal remain hidden from the public and from rank-and-file Democratic
lawmakers. The story notes that, for instance, Democratic corporate lobbyist
Scott Parven is "eager to do his part to bolster support for the free-trade
agreements." He said: "We need to have more Democratic business lobbyists
talking to Democratic members and staff." Parven then went on the attack
against the labor, environmental, small business, agriculture and consumer
protection organizations who oppose the deal. "We need to provide a
substantive counterpoint to activists on the left who are banging members
over the head saying this is a terrible deal." Another Democratic business
lobbyist added, "The reality is that Democrats are going to be split on
trade issues, so the business community's main agenda is going to be to
shore up virtually unanimous support among Republicans in the House and work
with Rangel and Levin and the leadership to get 70 to 100 Democrats."The
lobbyist "said that K Street supporters of the deal are coordinating with
the pro-trade New Democrat Coalition to win over hesitant Democrats."
K STREET FRETS OVER POSSIBILITY OF MAJOR OPPOSITION TO SECRET DEAL: Inside
U.S. Trade last week reported that "U.S. industry supporters of the
bilateral free trade agreement with Peru have privately expressed fears that
a vote in the trade committees could be tighter than expected when the deal
comes up. In the Senate Finance Committee, while Montana Sen. Max Baucus was
at the press conference announcing the secret deal, "some supporters are
worried that Sens. Debbie Stabenow (D-MI), Jay Rockefeller (D-WV) and Kent
Conrad (D-ND) may vote against the Peru FTA." The newsletter additionally
reports that the legislative language of the secret deal remains secret, but
lobbyists "are aware that House Democrats opposed to the template will
closely scrutinize the legal text and the extent to which it lives up to the
conceptual framework." The pressure to release the details for public
analysis means "Democratic [Capitol Hill] staff wants to make sure it will
stand up to that scrutiny."
PELOSI SAYS SHE WILL IGNORE THE MAJORITY OF DEMS IF THEY OPPOSE THE SECRET
DEAL: Rank and file Democrats, led by Reps. Brad Sherman (D-CA) and Marcy
Kaptur (D-OH), are planning to push a Democratic caucus resolution barring
the Speaker of the House from bringing the Bush administration's request for
reauthorization of fast track to the House floor for a vote unless a
majority of Democrats approve. When asked about this resolution this week,
Inside U.S. Trade reports that Pelosi balked, indicating she will ignore the
resolution. "I would encourage my colleagues not to be proposing resolutions
that say the majority of the majority does this or that," she said at a
press conference, adding: "I have to take into consideration something
broader than the majority of the majority of the Democratic Caucus."
Currently, polls show the majority of Americans oppose the continuation of
the current lobbyist-written trade policies that fast track advances.
Congressional Quarterly [3] reports that according to "a member of Pelosi's
leadership team" a number "of Democrats are now calling for a 'majority of
the majority' rule on the issue of free trade." This senior Democratic
lawmaker said: "The vote on extending funding for the war created a great
deal of anxiety and put stress on the caucus. People are concerned that it
will set a precedent. They are asking whether this will occur on other
issues."
DEM LEADERS STILL SAY THEY WILL RELY ON MAJORITY OF REPUBLICANS TO PASS THE
SECRET DEAL: Last week, Democrats used parliamentary rules to use a majority
of Republican votes to give President Bush a blank check to continue the
Iraq War. Now, Inside U.S. Trade reports that House Ways and Means Committee
Chairman Charlie Rangel expects he will require votes from the vast majority
of Republicans in order to pass the secret deal - over the objections of
most Democrats. Rangel is still declining to give an estimate of how many
Democrats would support the secret deal "except to signal he did not expect
a majority of the [Democratic] caucus." Observers "say the most Democratic
votes Peru and Panama will attract is roughly 70" - or less than a third of
all Democrats in Congress. Roll Call [4] reports that "Rangel's negotiating
with GOP leaders and the White House on trade with Pelosi's blessing angered
liberals within the Caucus, who fear the House will move forward with trade
measures opposed by a large bloc of the majority party." For his part,
Sherman told Inside U.S. Trade that he believes Pelosi "would not allow this
legislation to come to the floor for a vote unless it has the 'overwhelming
support' of the Democratic Caucus." Sherman "said he based that assessment
on 'impressions' he gained in his conversation with Pelosi."
MORE STATES PASS RESOLUTIONS DEMANDING CONGRESS REJECT FAST TRACK: Public
Citizen reports that two more states have passed resolutions demanding
Congress reject President Bush's request to reauthorize fast track
authority - the authority that allows the White House to eliminate all
labor, environmental and human rights protections from trade deals. Both
Pennsylvania [5] and Nevada [6] were the latest legislatures to pass the
resolution. Democratic leaders in Congress, nonetheless, continue to say
that the secret trade deal may pave the way for them to support Bush's fast
track request.
NY TIMES - "FAULT LINES RE-EMERGING IN THE DEM PARTY" OVER THE DEAL: The New
York Times [7] reports that five months into the new Congress, "fault lines
were re-emerging in the party." Specifically, "House Democrats are only
beginning to deal with their deep divisions on trade, as a closed caucus
last week underscored." Some freshmen, like Representative Betty Sutton,
Democrat of Ohio, are intent on making major changes to American trade
policy, much greater than the recent deal with the Bush administration on
environmental and labor standards announced by the Democratic leadership.
"Our problems with the trading system and the fact that it is broken are
much bigger than just having these standards on paper," Ms. Sutton said.
COLUMNIST - JORDAN TRADE DEAL SHOWS WHY NEW SECRET DEAL SHOULD BE LOOKED AT
WITH SKEPTICISM: Citing the utter lack of enforcement of much-touted labor
protections in the Jordan Free Trade Agreement, syndicate columnist Robyn
Blumner [8] writes in the Salt Lake Tribune that "this example is why I
approach the 'historic' deal struck between congressional Democrats and the
Bush administration on future trade deals with a dose of skepticism." She
notes that "in the same Agence France Presse story announcing the agreement
in which Democratic leaders cheered the advance, the U.S. Chamber of
Commerce and the National Association of Manufacturers are quoted as also
welcoming the deal" because "as Tom Donohue, president and chief executive
of the Chamber explained, they'd been given assurances, relative to American
workers, 'that the labor provisions cannot be read to require compliance
with ILO Conventions.'" She concludes: "If our government won't ensure that
overseas workers who produce goods that come into our country are treated
decently, then maybe it's time for the private sector to have a shot. The
Decent Working Conditions and Fair Competition Act has been introduced in
Congress. It would bar the import of goods made with sweatshop labor and
would give U.S. companies the ability to sue their competitors that sell
them."
NATIONAL JOURNAL - LABOR PROVISIONS "UNLIKELY" TO BE ENFORCEABLE: National
Journal trade expert Bruce Stokes writes that "it is unlikely that if a
country violates the labor-rights provisions it will be subject to any quick
penalties" under the secret deal. "The process for the reimposition of
tariffs to enforce labor rights, under this deal, is modeled on similar
language in the free-trade agreement with Jordan," he writes. "But that
provision has never been tested. And, as some on the left have already
pointed out, it is unlikely that the anti-union Bush administration will
agree to bring a case against the abuse of labor."
MIAMI HERALD - STATE DEPARTMENT CITED PERU FOR LABOR VIOLATIONS: The Miami
Herald [9] reports that the government of Peru is expected to rubber stamp
the secret trade deal, and that the deal is pushing forward even though "the
U.S. State Department reported last year that Peruvian companies illegally
keep workers from joining labor unions and deliberately hire workers
informally to avoid providing healthcare or paid vacations." The report
"also found that some 30,000 people do forced labor -- particularly in the
logging industry -- and tens of thousands of children are working,
particularly in rural areas and in the drug trade."
HAYDEN - SECRET DEAL IS "FRESHENED" NAFTA: Writing in the San Francisco
Chronicle [10], House Speaker Nancy Pelosi's hometown paper, longtime
progressive activist Tom Hayden says the secret trade deal poses a "crisis"
for Democrats. "Besides ending the Iraq war, the top priority of American
voters in November 2006 was fair trade," Hayden writes, citing public
opinion polls. "Nevertheless, on May 10 Pelosi, White House officials and
pro-corporate Democrats announced a surprise "bipartisan" agreement on
trade, without revealing any details. As the package is rushed to a vote, it
appears to be a 'freshened' version of NAFTA (the phrase is that of Mickey
Kantor, trade czar under President Bill Clinton)." Pelosi, he says, "faces
strong opposition from most members of her caucus, labor leaders and
environmental activists" because she is "promoting the common agendas of
Wall Street, Hollywood and the New Democrats." The ultimate question, Hayden
concludes, is "whether the Democrats will continue their support of
NAFTA-style trade agreements, or else begin to construct a kind of global
New Deal as an alternative."
NY TIMES - COLOMBIA HAS NOT MADE NECESSARY IMPROVEMENTS: The ardently free
trade New York Times editorial board [11] writes that the proposed free
trade pact with Colombia "rightly remains in legislative limbo over a much
starker labor problem - Colombia leads the world in the killing of labor
activists." Though President