Senate Finance leaders diverge on CAFTA

Senate Finance leaders diverge on CAFTA    Leaders of the U.S. Senate Finance Committee expressed opposing views on the proposed U.S.-Central American Free Trade Agreement, further testing the ability of Congress to move the trade deal forward.
   In opening remarks at a Tuesday mark-up session, Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa, called CAFTA “a two-way street” with economic benefits for both Central America and the United States.
   “We have very little to lose and much to gain from its passage,” Grassley said. “In contrast, we have much to lose and little to gain by its defeat.”
   In addition to the United States, the agreement includes Costa Rica, El Salvador, Guatemala, Honduras, Nicaragua and the Domincan Republic. The agreement originated at the Quebec Summit of the Americas in April 2001.
   Grassley said some proposed amendments to CAFTA “go far beyond that which is necessary or appropriate to implement the agreement.
   “Some of these create entire new federal programs that are totally unrelated to this agreement,” he said. “Others trample on the jurisdiction of other Senate committees.”
   Max Baucus, D-Mont., ranking member of the Senate Finance Committee, warned CAFTA is “shaping up to be the biggest trade battle to come before Congress in a decade.”
   Baucus criticized industry groups that have pressured committee members not to consider amendments to CAFTA in order to ensure its quick passage.
   “Telling Congress not to consider amendments upsets that balance (with the executive branch) and belittles the role of Congress,” Baucus said. “But in the end it only serves to confirm the objections of those who see fast-track as an abdication of congressional authority.”
   Baucus also said he agrees with the concerns that Montana’s sugar beet farmers and two sugar processing plants have with CAFTA.
   “The (Bush) administration likes to say that the new sugar quota under CAFTA is only about a teaspoon a day. Nothing to worry about. But the administration’s own study from the International Trade Commission predicts that CAFTA will lead directly to the loss of more than 3,000 jobs in the sugar sector,” Baucus said.
   “Well Montana’s sugar producers don’t accept that 3,000 sugar jobs is a trivial effect — and neither do I,” he said. “I am disappointed that the administration is willing to undermine our sugar program by negotiating important aspects of that program in bilateral trade agreements.”