While Congress prepares to finalize action one way or the other on President Obama’s authority to negotiate trade agreements with other countries, there continues to be no shortage of “facts,” figures, and talking points. Unfortunately, much of this information is wrong. This obfuscation and factual inaccuracy serves only to weaken the very transparency regarding trade negotiations that is already lacking and detracts from an important and legitimate policy debate.
As the representative of Colorado’s second Congressional district, my number one priority has always been ensuring that my constituents enjoy every opportunity to achieve a slice of the American dream. This means the ability to attain quality, affordable education, land a good-paying job, and secure a safe retirement.
Trade can empower this American dream by boosting our economy, supporting American jobs, and opening up international markets to Made-in- America, and Made-in-Colorado products. Nearly nine out of ten exporters in our district are small- and medium-sized businesses. People like Nick Martin, of Pro’s Closet in Boulder — a store specializing in reselling cycling equipment — will tell you how trade agreements can help him reach the 95 percent of the world’s consumers beyond America’s borders. Mary Jane Loevlie, CEO of Shotcrete Technologies in Idaho Springs, can explain how exports account for roughly half of her small firm’s sales.
Colorado dairy and cheese producers will tell you about the outrageously high export tariffs they face in Japan — as high as 600 percent in some cases! It’s simply not fair, and we need to do something about it.
Unfortunately, some are unwilling to hear these local voices. On these very pages, opponents are muddling the discussion of Fast Tracks vs. Smart Tracks vs. whatever-they-call their version of trade authority (TPA) or pretending they are the same thing in an attempt to mask the fact that they are simply against providing President Obama authority to negotiate trade agreements. The accompanying infographic I prepared shows the differences between Fast Tracks (2002), Fast Tracks 2.0 (2014), and Smart Tracks (2015).
Despite the benefits of free and fair trade, there are certain issues on which I will not compromise. If a trade agreement were to undermine our national sovereignty or weaken our food safety or environmental laws — including fracking restrictions — I would strongly oppose it. And while I don’t think President Obama would negotiate such a bad agreement anyway, it is a relief to know that the current Smart Tracks proposal specifically prevents any trade agreement that undermines our sovereignty or gives corporations any additional rights. That language — that protection —is written into the proposed bill.
With President Obama at the wheel, I hope we will see a people-centric rather than corporate-centric trade deal; one that helps save wild fisheries; protects endangered forests and jungles; works to end child labor; and helps independent labor unions establish themselves in countries like Vietnam.
These three questions form the core of my support for Smart Tracks:
1) Is NAFTA working well as is? NAFTA has fallen short of its promise and TPP is our only realistic chance to replace it. We’ve learned a lot in the two decades since NAFTA was crafted, like the need for enforceable and strengthened labor and environmental standards. Anyone who opposes the authority for President Obama to negotiate new trade agreement with Canada and Mexico (and nine other countries) is realistically consigning us to another few decades of the NAFTA status quo.
Of course the more important question is, will TPP truly improve upon NAFTA — or will it be worse? President Obama has lofty goals and public input will be key to making this determination. That’s why it’s critical to release the text so that civil society groups can weigh in. Under Smart Tracks, unlike Fast Tracks, we require 60 days of full public disclosure of any trade agreement before the President signs, BEFORE the bill even comes to Congress.
2) Do you trust President Obama to negotiate a good trade agreement?
I trust President Obama more than I trust the Republican Congress to negotiate trade agreements that are in the best interests of the people of our country rather than the big corporations, trade agreements that help lift all boats rather than provide profits for only a few. I haven’t always agreed on everything with this President — the PATRIOT act and the surveillance state, for instance — but on core issues of economic justice, I am proud of and share our President’s values.
3) Should we have trade agreements at all?
Trade agreements, when carefully constructed, deploy the power of commerce to help fuel the exchange of ideas and culture and bring people together. They provide a civil way to solve commercial disputes, replacing the gunboat diplomacy of generations past. They open new markets for our businesses and provide a mechanism by which we can improve the qualityof-life for the world’s workers.
Nancy Pelosi wrote a terrific op-ed on trade in USA Today last week, in part observing:
“As we look to the future, it is clear that the debate on the trade authority is probably the last of its kind. The intense debate of the past few weeks has further convinced me that we need a new paradigm.”
I suggest a new global engagement on trade — an engagement that enables voices from all aspects of the world’s economies to be heard.
We must give workers more leverage and have more open discussion, with greater transparency and stronger accountability than the World Trade Organization or other trade negotiations.
Hopefully the passage or failure of Smart Tracks will be an important step towards changing the discussion from Fast Tracks vs. Smart Tracks vs. no tracks to how globalization can be made to work for everybody and the health of the planet.
I wish we lived in a perfect world. We don’t. If you generally support the values of President Obama rather than the values of big corporations, then I think it will lead you to the same conclusion I have reached: We should give President Obama the best shot possible at re-writing the rules of trade to help ensure that workers, the environment, and the economy are all winners. And let’s not quit working to change the paradigm of trade and globalization.
