|
Updated April 12, 2005 APRIL 13 IS NATIONAL CAFTA CALL-IN DAY - CALL CONGRESS TO SAY NO CAFTA - NAFTA EXPANSION! The Bush Administration wants to bully Congress into a CAFTA vote by holding official hearings this week. We need to let Congress know that they answer to us, not the corporate CAFTA lobby. Here's what you can do: HOW TO TAKE ACTION ON APRIL 13:1. Call the Capitol switchboard toll free at 1-888-355-3588 on Wednesday, April 13 and give the operator your zip code to be connected to your Representative (either Butch Otter or Mike Simpson). 2. Ask to speak to the trade staffer, chief of staff, or legislative director. 3. Tell them you are a constituent and want to know your Representative's position on CAFTA. 4. Let us know what your Representative said. Email your feedback to cafta@idahogreenparty.org. 5. Mail a letter TODAY to the Governor demanding that Idaho be taken off the list of states participating in CAFTA. Mail a letter TODAY to your Mayor and County Commissioners asking them to put pressure on the Governor to do so. Sample letters are below. Talking points and phone scripts Click here for Governor Kempthorne's response to recent letters. Actions for you to take NOW:
Governor Kempthorne sent a letter to US Trade Representative (USTR) Robert Zoellick, in which he committed Idaho not only to the CAFTA plan, but other trade pacts. Until there is a vote on one of these agreements, the governor can pull Idaho off the list. These rules rob state legislatures of their authority to decide how state tax dollars are spent and put an array of common purchasing policies at risk - giving closed-door trade tribunals the final word. And despite the Idaho state legislature passing a joint resolution in opposition to CAFTA, the governor has committed our state to this pact. The most obvious victims of this agreement are Idaho's farmers (particularly sugar beet growers). Run-of-the-mill state purchasing policies (including all colleges and universities subject to central purchasing oversight) that would be prohibited under these "trade" rules include preferences for recycled content and renewable energy, bans on products made with sweatshop labor, living wage, and prevailing wage laws, and preferences for locally produced goods and services. It threatens our local economy when local government will be prevented from hiring from local workforce or purchasing locally produced goods. The "Buy Idaho" campaign will literally become a liability under globalism's rules. On March 18, 2004, the Idaho State Legislature passed a Joint Memorial opposing CAFTA. The memorial urges fair trade rather than free trade and recognizes the economic impacts CAFTA would have in Idaho. These trade agreements would also force Idaho governments to import goods and services that could be provided locally, destroying what is left of local economies. Please be sure to mention this piece when you communicate with elected officials. Idaho Green Party letters regarding CAFTA: Letter to Boise Mayor Dave Bieter Response: letter acknowledging Kempthorne's decision on CAFTA and a copy of the letter he sent to USTR Zoeller in January 2004 committing Idaho to the trade agreements. Letter to Idaho Attorney General Larry Wasden Response: his office isn't concerned with such matters and the issue beyond its reach. Please send a copy of any responses you get from local leaders to us at contact info below, and we'll post them. Background: An Appalling CAFTA/FTAA Sneak Attack on State Purchasing Policy (3/21/04) A leaked letter from the Bush Administration to state governors reveals a sneaky attempt now underway to get governors to "voluntarily" commit their states to comply with draconian constraints on domestic procurement (purchasing) policy included in the recently completed CAFTA and proposed for FTAA. Unbelievably, the leaked documents show that the US Trade Representative's Office is seeking blanket permission from governors to sign states on to the procurement provisions of ALL trade agreements under negotiation - including the Free Trade Area of the Americas (FTAA), the Central American Free Trade Agreement (CAFTA), the South African Customs Union and a raft of bilateral deals with Australia, Morocco, Columbia, Thailand and more nations. The recently released CAFTA text lists 23 states as having agreed to "sign on" to that pact's procurement rules. How can a state be listed and all of its future spending policy constrained when neither state legislators, mayors nor city councils have been apprised of their new obligations - much less agreed! That's were you come in - making sure the state and local officials know that some "trade" rules negotiated behind closed doors without their input much less their approval are about to permanently shut down their right and authority to halt off-shoring of state services, require living or prevailing wages in government contracts, or preferences for recycled paper content, locally grown food, locally produced vehicles, etc. The good news is that until there is a vote on one of these agreements, the states can pull their names off the list with no liability. But once Congress votes to approve a pact, getting a state OFF the list requires compensating trading partners for their lost opportunity - an expensive and often unviable solution. The first pacts up for votes and as soon as this spring are CAFTA (US, Guatemala, El Salvador, Honduras, Nicaragua, and Costa Rica) and the US-Australia Free Trade Agreement. We know that if we all work hard we can defeat CAFTA in Congress and that would save progressive procurement policies from being ravaged by CAFTA - but the USTR's letter to governors requesting their buy-in extends to ALL future agreements. USTR continues right now to court and to pressure governors of states that have not yet done so to sign away state and local officials' rights. The USTR has billed the request to governors as an innocuous extension of the WTO's Agreement on Government Procurement (AGP), claiming that signing up would simply create opportunities for US producers and service providers to compete for foreign contracts. Only some states signed the WTO's AGP and since then the AGP's track record includes the demise of states' procurement policies aimed at avoiding business with the Burmese dictatorship and pressuring Nigeria for better labor rights. And, an analysis of the proposed pacts' rules reveal that at stake is the ability to set policy - not just the right to compete for contracts. But even state and local officials to whom a governor might have shown this letter (we have not found any such officials yet) would have no idea that at risk are: To make matters even worse, the process that USTR is using to seek "consent" from the states is illegal. Setting government procurement policy and deciding whether to cede to policy constraints imposed by a trade agreement is within the realm of state legislatures and city councils. The governor's whim - a decision taken with disregard of what is at stake - cannot be allowed to override the constitutional authority of state and local elected officials. Yet if Idaho remains listed when an agreement is approved by Congress on January 8, 2005, that state becomes bound with no way to withdraw without compensating other countries even if the initial sign-on process was not legal. It's not too late to act! Until Congress votes in favor of a specific pact (January 8, 2005), the list of 20-plus states whose governors appear to have already said yes to the sneaky USTR letter are not legally bound and can get taken off the list as easily as they got on. State and city legislators must make it known that they demand prior informed consent on all provisions of international trade agreements that implicate state and local policy in order to stop future power grabs of state and local authority. For more information, please visit: http://www.citizen.org/trade/caftahttp://www.tradewatch.org/cafta Click here for a copy of the CAFTA document Issue summary prepared by Gwen Sanchirico and Sara Johnson for Public Citizen's Global Trade Watch. Contact Gwen (208) 388-4549 with any questions or responses you receive from elected officials. |